| From: | Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Some questions about mammoth replication |
| Date: | 2007-10-11 16:10:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20071011161018.GB14942@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 10/11/07, Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > > For what use cases do you think your WAL-based approach is better than
> > > Slony/Skytools trigger-based one ?
> >
> > A pure trigger based approach can only replicate data for the commands
> > which fire triggers. AFAIK Slony is unable to replicate TRUNCATE
> > command (I don't know if Skytools can). Replicator doesn't have this
> > limitation.
>
> No, Skytools is same as Slony.
>
> Can you also replicate changes to system tables?
No, we need a table to have primary key to be able to replicate it. From
the other hand replicating a system relation can be dangerous, i.e. what if
you replicate the contents of pg_class without corresponing relations on the slave, that's why explicitly forbid enabling replication for relations from pg_catalog namespace.
Regards,
--
Alexey Klyukin http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brendan Jurd | 2007-10-11 16:11:28 | Re: [HACKERS] quote_literal with NULL |
| Previous Message | Nikolay Samokhvalov | 2007-10-11 16:04:16 | Re: full text search in 8.3 |