Robert Treat wrote:
> >> 2. Simple, low-overhead replication
> >
> > Great progress here with hot standby which satisfies a great number
> > of replication needs with very low overhead. I would not call it
> > "simple" yet, but there are some tools out there that are attempting
> > to fix this. Sometimes you need more than hot standby of course, and
> > none of Bucardo, Slony, or Londiste are simple or low overhead. To be
> > fair, however, I wonder how simple and low overhead some of the other
> > RDBMSs solutions are. This one is mostly done.
> >
> 
> You're much more optimistic than I am about this. Most of the other
> databases offer built in solutions that are quite a bit more flexible
> than what pg offers, and I don't see any changes to that on the
> horizon. See Haas' recent blog post on the topic for some limitations
> we aren't trying to solve. I think we'll have to embrace statement
> based replication at some point, but I know a lot of people are pretty
> against the idea.

I hope people are not confusing logical row replication with
statement-based (SQL query) replication.  Robert was talking about the
former, and the later is fraught with problems.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

• Re: Top five challenges at 2011-03-02 05:02:53 from Robert Treat

pgsql-www by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2011-03-10 16:01:57
	Subject: Re: Top five challenges
Previous:	From: hans wulf	Date: 2011-03-10 12:31:03
	Subject: Read uncommitted ever possible?

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2011-03-10 16:01:57
	Subject: Re: Top five challenges
Previous:	From: Alvaro Herrera	Date: 2011-03-10 14:22:19
	Subject: Re: Slow parliament election processing in Estonia blamed on Postgres