> .... Correct me if I am wrong, but will it not also suffer the same
> limitation as any statement based replication, namely that the "merged" > slave will have to sustain the same write load as all shards combined ?
I cannot tell you the exact mimeo behaviour, but if you incremental replication using an id/timestamp by >pulling< changes from the masters, you will normally batch them and insert all the changes to the slaves in a single transaction, which leads to less load as many times your limit is in transaction rate, not record rate. (i.e., every 5 minutes you query for all the tuples changed, and insert/update them all in one go ) ( Also, if tuples are updated many times between sweeps the slave will get only one ) Francisco Olarte.
You are right, requesting changes at fixed time intervals would certainly help reduce the load. I will have to test and see if a good balance can be achieved between not having stale data for too long and keeping up with writes.
