Re: AW: Postgres Replication

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
Cc: "'Darren Johnson'" <djohnson(at)greatbridge(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: AW: Postgres Replication
Date: 2001-06-12 09:07:41
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.33.0106120605130.411-100000@mobile.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


which I believe is what the rserv implementation in contrib currently does
... no?

its funny ... what is in contrib right now was developed in a weekend by
Vadim, put in contrib, yet nobody has either used it *or* seen fit to
submit patches to improve it ... ?

On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:

>
> > Although
> > Postgres-R is a synchronous approach, I believe it is the closest to
> > the goal mentioned above. Here is an abstract of the advantages.
>
> If you only want synchronous replication, why not simply use triggers ?
> All you would then need is remote query access and two phase commit,
> and maybe a little script that helps create the appropriate triggers.
>
> Doing a replicate all or nothing approach that only works synchronous
> is imho not flexible enough.
>
> Andreas
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
>

Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bob Deblier 2001-06-12 12:35:43 Re: dlopen() of libpgsqlodbc.so >= release 7.1 fails on sparc solaris 2.8
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB 2001-06-12 07:35:03 AW: Implicit order-by in Postgresql?