Re: Query on postgres_fdw extension

From: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Swathi P <swathi(dot)bluepearl(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Query on postgres_fdw extension
Date: 2021-06-01 10:24:31
Message-ID: CALj2ACXJOvjg1zhpB7RSC3jydFxEJumvDbfrG4fBHZuZFQKxNw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-general

On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 3:31 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 6:08 PM Swathi P <swathi(dot)bluepearl(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > In our sharding solution, we have multiple coodinator nodes. If we declare the table column as serial data type, we might end up having duplicate values for id column in the table_a in host_b (data node) as cconnections come from multiple coordinatoor nodes and might end up in duplicate key violations.
> >
> > Hence we decided to have the coordinator nodes as stateless and hence declared the column with no serial/sequence. Let me know if this makes sense.
>
> It seems reasonable to me to make coodinator nodes stateless, but may
> I ask the reason you use multiple coordinator nodes?

Perhaps, as a redundant node to avoid single point of failures? It's
just a guess as I'm not the right one to answer that question though.

With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Eugene Pazhitnov 2021-06-01 11:53:10 jsonb merge with update ... on conflict do
Previous Message Etsuro Fujita 2021-06-01 10:01:57 Re: Query on postgres_fdw extension

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zahir Lalani 2021-06-01 11:45:32 RE: Framework for 0 downtime deploys
Previous Message Etsuro Fujita 2021-06-01 10:01:57 Re: Query on postgres_fdw extension