Hi,
Robert Hodges wrote:
> Could you expand on why logical application of WAL records is impractical in
> these cases? This is what Oracle does. Moreover once you are into SQL a
> lot of other use cases immediately become practical, such as large scale
> master/slave set-ups for read scaling.
I cannot speak for Tom, but what strikes me as a strange approach here
is using the WAL for "logical application" of changes. That's because
the WAL is quite far away from SQL, and thus from a "logical
representation" of the data. It's rather pretty physical, meaning it's
bound to a certain Postgres release and CPU architecture.
A more "logical" exchange format certainly poses less problems across
releases, encodings and CPU architectures. Or even across RDMSen. But
hey, let's see what Simon comes up with...
Regards
Markus Wanner
