Re: Replication options

On Feb 19, 2004, at 1:24 PM, Simon Windsor wrote:

> Hi
>
>  
>
> I am used to using Oracle (15 years) and MySQL(5 years), but I am
> planning to move an existing application from MySQL to Postgres. The
> reasons are very simple,
>
>  
> • New requirements means we need views, or a significant re-write
> • Better query/index performance essential.
> • Postgres and MySQL share a very common implementation of SQL-92,
> and what is missing can easily be implanted in functions
>
>  
>
> The only negative issue is replication. I have checked several
> Postgres Replication options and unsure which way to go. Can anyone
> recommend a replication option that meets the following:
>
>  
> • Does not use triggers. Usually slow, and one action that modifies
> several records, can trigger many actions on slaves/peers.
> • Does use WAL, or other log, so that SQL DDL/DML is copied to
> slave/peer, rather than the result of the DDL/DML.

I think only Mammoth's ships WAL logs. Josh?

> • Must provide master-master and master-slave replication

I don't think any of the solutions will do master-master.

> • Simple to configure and maintain
>
>  
>
> Many Thanx
>
>  
>
> Simon Windsor
>
> Eml: simon(dot)windsor(at)cornfield(dot)org(dot)uk
>
> Tel: 01454 617689
>
> Mob: 07960 321599
>
>  
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> Mailscanner thanks transtec Computers for their support.
--------------------

Andrew Rawnsley
President
The Ravensfield Digital Resource Group, Ltd.
(740) 587-0114
www.ravensfield.com