Re: replication choices - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ben
Subject Re: replication choices
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.64.0702061146000.28404@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: replication choices  (Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca>)
List pgsql-general
Yeah, log shipping looks like it solves the network problem, except for
the part about how how I must replicate to a normal slony node before I
can get logs to ship. We don't have the hardware to have a secondary
database at every site. :(

On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 12:17:52PM -0800, Ben wrote:
>> familiar with Slony, and from what I understand, using Slony with bad
>> networks leads to bad problems. I'm also not sure that Slony supports
>> replicating from multiple sources to the same postgres install, even if
>> each replication process is writing to a different schema.
>
> Yes, you can have multiple origins into the same database, without a
> problem.  I'd be worried for sure about the network unreliability,
> though.  You might, however, be able to do this usefully using the
> log shipping features of Slony.
>
> I would _not_ worry about the outbound replication from the centre,
> assuming that the changes are infrequent.
>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan  | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
> In the future this spectacle of the middle classes shocking the avant-
> garde will probably become the textbook definition of Postmodernism.
>                --Brad Holland
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
>               http://archives.postgresql.org/
>

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Merlin Moncure"
Date:
Subject: Re: getting status transaction error
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] getting status transaction error