Thread: Save The Date: Cluster-Hackers meeting May 21st
Hackers, Replication aficionados: The 4th Cluster-Hackers Summit will be Tuesday, May 21st, on or near the campus of the University of Ottawa. Anyone working on clustering, replication, pooling or federated database tools and features is urged to attend. This includes proprietary clustering systems to a limited extent. More information as details are finalized. For not, we wanted you to know to book flights and accomodations which let you be there for most of the day on the 21st. Also, don't forget about the Unconference on Saturday! -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
On 10 January 2013 17:54, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > The 4th Cluster-Hackers Summit will be Tuesday, May 21st, on or near the > campus of the University of Ottawa. Anyone working on clustering, > replication, pooling or federated database tools and features is urged > to attend. > This includes proprietary clustering systems to a limited extent. Given last year we didn't have more than 30 mins to spend on logical replication, how much time will we have to discuss non-open source systems? Can I check whether the agenda of this meeting is open? -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
> Given last year we didn't have more than 30 mins to spend on logical > replication, how much time will we have to discuss non-open source > systems? Mostly the idea is to discuss what some of the proprietary systems need from core postgres, especially where it overlaps with what OSS systems need and where the sponsoring companies are > > Can I check whether the agenda of this meeting is open? > Given that we haven't even put up a wiki page yet or set an hourly schedule, it's completely open. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
On 01/15/2013 11:51 AM, Josh Berkus wrote: > >> Given last year we didn't have more than 30 mins to spend on logical >> replication, how much time will we have to discuss non-open source >> systems? > > Mostly the idea is to discuss what some of the proprietary systems need > from core postgres, especially where it overlaps with what OSS systems > need and where the sponsoring companies are Feh, got cut off. ... where the sponsoring companies are willing to contribute to core Postgres. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
Cluster summit should focus on what PG core should do to support various clustering use case and external tools. I think logical replication as well as DDL trigger should be given longer time to discuss. Regards; ---------- Koichi Suzuki 2013/1/16 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>: > On 01/15/2013 11:51 AM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> >>> Given last year we didn't have more than 30 mins to spend on logical >>> replication, how much time will we have to discuss non-open source >>> systems? >> >> Mostly the idea is to discuss what some of the proprietary systems need >> from core postgres, especially where it overlaps with what OSS systems >> need and where the sponsoring companies are > > Feh, got cut off. > > ... where the sponsoring companies are willing to contribute to core > Postgres. > > > -- > Josh Berkus > PostgreSQL Experts Inc. > http://pgexperts.com > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-cluster-hackers mailing list (pgsql-cluster-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-cluster-hackers
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Koichi Suzuki <koichi.szk@gmail.com> wrote:
+1
Cluster summit should focus on what PG core should do to support
various clustering use case and external tools. I think logical
replication as well as DDL trigger should be given longer time to
discuss.
+1
I won't be able to attend, unfortunately. But I hope that another conversation happens at PgCon:
I am very interested in defining terms and setting up repeatable testing for replication. I've started this wiki page:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Binary_Replication_Tools
I am very interested in defining terms and setting up repeatable testing for replication. I've started this wiki page:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Binary_Replication_Tools
What I've found is that we don't use consistent terminology for these tools, and they largely don't provide complete test cases that would help someone setting up replication, backups and restores.
I've made some very rough shell scripts to test each one, but it needs quite a bit more work. My ultimate goal is to see these kinds of scripts incorporated into a Jenkins-like system that can automatically test new releases against new versions of PostgreSQL. I find it really problematic that we don't have a consistent way of doing this. Sysadmins who are supporting these tools are particularly disadvantaged because they are often supporting other databases and systems that have wildly different backup procedures.
Just the other day, a friend told me about failing over and not having secondary slaves follow the new master in a 9.0 system. The information about which versions of Postgres support this feature is not easy to find. I plan on incorporating that information in this wiki page over time -- but again, we need to standardize terminology across all of the third-party tools (open source and otherwise) so that people using these are not caught by surprise when they are the most vulnerable to data loss.
-selena
--
http://chesnok.com