Re: Peer to peer replication of Postgresql databases - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: Peer to peer replication of Postgresql databases
Date
Msg-id 87bs61kli3.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Peer to peer replication of Postgresql databases  (Anuradha Ratnaweera <anuradha@lklug.pdn.ac.lk>)
Responses Re: Peer to peer replication of Postgresql databases  (Anuradha Ratnaweera <anuradha@lklug.pdn.ac.lk>)
List pgsql-hackers
[ pgsql-patches removed from Cc: list ]

Anuradha Ratnaweera <anuradha@lklug.pdn.ac.lk> writes:
> I am trying to add some replication features to postgres (yes, I have
> already looked at ongoing work), in a peer to peer manner.

Did you look at the research behind Postgres-R, and the pgreplication
stuff?

> - When a frontend process sends a read query, each backend process
>   does that from its own data area.

Surely that's not correct -- a SELECT can be handled by *any one*
node, not each and every one, right?

> - There are two types of write queries.  Postmasters use seperate
>   communication channels for each.  One is the sequencial channel which
>   carries writes whose order is important, and the non-sequencial
>   channel carries write queries whose order is not important.

How do you distinguish between these?

Cheers,

Neil

-- 
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jan Wieck
Date:
Subject: Re: MySQL vs PostgreSQL.
Next
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: move 0 behaviour