Re: Postgresql Replication Comparison Required

Hello,

in general my advice would be to stick with native features, therefore
use either Streaming Replication (or alternatively log shipping
replication). You might need some tools to help you manage the cluster,
clients routing and balancing but I suggest you look into this later.

On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 16:55:00 +0530, saurabh gupta
<saurabh(dot)b85(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> If I would require replication for backup purpose only 

For disaster recovery, you need physical base backups with continous
archiving
(http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/interactive/continuous-archiving.html)

> If I would require to scale the reads 

You need Hot Standby here (and you might need to route read only
applications to one of the slaves somehow - but you can worry about this
later).

> If I would require High Avaliability and Consistency 

Streaming replication. With 9.1 you also have Synchronous Streaming
Replication which means you have zero data loss of committed
transactions within your PostgreSQL cluster. Another useful tool you
might want to look into is repmgr (www.repmgr.org).

> Also It will be very helpful if you can share the perfomance or
> experience with postgresql replication solutions. 

I wish I could help you more here, but most of our professional work is
performed under strict NDAs.

An interesting and useful documentation section is this also:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/interactive/high-availability.html

I hope this helps.

Cheers,
Gabriele
--
Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Gabriele(dot)Bartolini(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)it - www.2ndQuadrant.it