Thanks a lot for your suggestions. I have ony single master.
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org]
On Behalf Of Richard Huxton
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 9:13 PM
To: Chris Browne
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Database Synchronization
Chris Browne wrote:
> dev@archonet.com (Richard Huxton) writes:
>>
>> http://www.slony.info/
> But it is worth noting one thing about the synchronization...
>
> Slony-I's strategy is pretty simple: One node is considered the
> "master," and the other node is forcibly made to conform to what is on
> the master.
>
> If you want to synchronize back and forth (e.g. - multimaster
> replication of some sort), Slony-I is not suitable...
Except in the case when you can have separate tables for the data. If
you have a london_sales table only updated in London and a paris_sales
table only updated in Paris then you have something inching towards
multi-master.
-- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
