Re: 7.4? - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Subject | Re: 7.4? |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200303061644.h26GiMn03063@candle.pha.pa.us Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: 7.4? (Hervé Piedvache <herve@elma.fr>) |
List | pgsql-general |
You might want to look at my replication talk: http://candle.pha.pa.us/main/writings/pgsql/replication.pdf Basically, single-master uses async because it is faster, but when you need multimaster, you usually need sync or a Postgres-R-type approach. Seems there too may replication needs, so even Postgres-R will remain a plugin option for PostgreSQL, like the other replication solutions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Herv� Piedvache wrote: > Le Mercredi 26 F?vrier 2003 07:52, Tom Lane a ?crit : > > Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes: > > > On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 22:44, Ed L. wrote: > > >> And do I understand correctly the replication to be eventually > > >> included will be an embedded syncronous replication solution based on > > >> Postgres-R and the Spread GCS? > > > > > > No, I don't think that's set in stone (although I can't speak for the > > > core team). While I think Postgres-R is promising, there might be room > > > for additional replication implementations that cater to different sets > > > of requirements. > > > > There absolutely *is* room for multiple replication implementations. > > AFAICS there's no one-size-fits-all approach. I did and still do like > > Postgres-R as a pretty useful approach, but it should not be mistaken > > for The One True Path. > > > > Also, there are nontrivial licensing issues involved. The PG-R design > > depends on an underlying "group communication" system, which is a > > nontrivial bit of software that none of the core team wants to rewrite. > > But none of the available GC systems are BSD-license open source. We > > had had some hopes of getting Spread to offer BSD terms, but that seems > > to have fallen through. So right now, PG-R is on the outside looking > > in, as far as inclusion in the core distribution goes :-( > > > > regards, tom lane > > You mean the PG-R project will no be included in the PostgreSQL project > unless someone rewrite the Spread GCS concept or similar system in a BSD > licence ? > > What a bad news for the community ... ! :o( > > PG-R seems to be the best integrated solution of the moment ... Still a lot > of work ... but Darren and others are making a real good job ! > > DBMirror or rserv (commercial application) seems to be only triggers, and > little demon not included in PostgreSQL system ... as PG-R is ... > > PostgreSQL really need an official Replication solution to be definitively > secured in a productive environnement ... and I think I'm not the only one > thinking like that ... looking the survey of Postgres.org web site : > http://www.postgresql.org/survey.php?View=1&SurveyID=9 > -- > Herv? Piedvache > > Elma Ing?nierie Informatique > 6 rue du Faubourg Saint-Honor? > F-75008 - Paris - France > Tel. 33-144949901 > fax. 33-144949902 > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
pgsql-general by date: