| From: | bricklen <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bèrto ëd Sèra <berto(dot)d(dot)sera(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Paula Kirsch <pl(dot)kirsch(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: bi-directional syncing help request |
| Date: | 2013-08-09 15:06:56 |
| Message-ID: | CAGrpgQ_7R2cXqXwW=rF1=Uf4qVk21H3e+VXOieWN61g8sTZWdg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:36 AM, Bèrto ëd Sèra <berto(dot)d(dot)sera(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:
> --all you need to do is switch master and slave so that "master" is the
> one box you are currently on
>
That probably isn't a reasonable solution, considering the OP mentioned
that she was not a professional DBA. Setting up a hot/warm standby, failing
over, resetting the slave from the new master, lather, rinse, repeat is
certainly scriptable but doesn't seem like the best option here.
I don't know of any commercial solutions, but writing some code might be
required. Synchronizing data isn't that difficult, but synchronizing
changes to database table structure will be a bit tricky,
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bèrto ëd Sèra | 2013-08-09 15:10:06 | Re: bi-directional syncing help request |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-08-09 14:53:39 | Re: Postgres won't start |