Re: BDR global sequences in two machine failover

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Giovanni Maruzzelli <gmaruzz(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BDR global sequences in two machine failover
Date: 2015-09-08 06:31:07
Message-ID: CAMsr+YEUk==PeLzdR63OXVoiOLS4xKayF_fsBbzzp-49B9Uy4w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 7 September 2015 at 20:56, Giovanni Maruzzelli <gmaruzz(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> If I do not use global sequences, and I use uuid as primary keys, would BDR
> be a correct choice?

For something like a VoIP service where eventual consistency is
usually OK and geographic redundancy with latency tolerance and
partition tolerance is needed, yes, it could make a lot of sense.

You could use UUID keys or use normal sequences with different offsets
on the nodes. UUID will probably be easier to manage.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2015-09-08 06:33:43 Re: bdr admin role
Previous Message Jayadevan M 2015-09-08 04:20:33 Re: Partitioning and constraint exclusion