Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL

From: Rick Vernam <rickv(at)hobi(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
Date: 2008-05-29 15:58:19
Message-ID: 200805291058.19443.rickv@hobi.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-hackers
On Thursday 29 May 2008 09:54:03 am Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 5/29/08, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > The Postgres core team met at PGCon to discuss a few issues, the largest
> >  of which is the need for simple, built-in replication for PostgreSQL.
> >  Historically the project policy has been to avoid putting replication
> >  into core PostgreSQL, so as to leave room for development of competing
> >  solutions, recognizing that there is no "one size fits all" replication
> >  solution.  However, it is becoming clear that this policy is hindering
> >  acceptance of PostgreSQL to too great an extent, compared to the benefit
> >  it offers to the add-on replication projects.  Users who might consider
> >  PostgreSQL are choosing other database systems because our existing
> >  replication options are too complex to install and use for simple cases.
> >  In practice, simple asynchronous single-master-multiple-slave
> >  replication covers a respectable fraction of use cases, so we have
> >  concluded that we should allow such a feature to be included in the core
> >  project.  We emphasize that this is not meant to prevent continued
> >  development of add-on replication projects that cover more complex use
> >  cases.
> >
> >  We believe that the most appropriate base technology for this is
> >  probably real-time WAL log shipping, as was demoed by NTT OSS at PGCon.
> >  We hope that such a feature can be completed for 8.4.
>
> +1
>
> Although I would explain it more shortly - we do need a solution for
> lossless failover servers and such solution needs to live in core backend.

+1 for lossless failover (ie, synchronous)

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2008-05-29 15:58:31
Subject: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Greg SmithDate: 2008-05-29 15:56:16
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Memory question on win32 systems

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2008-05-29 15:58:31
Subject: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Robert TreatDate: 2008-05-29 15:55:10
Subject: Re: State of PostgreSQL, BOF at OSCON?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group