| From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Darren Johnson'" <djohnson(at)greatbridge(dot)com>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | RE: AW: Postgres Replication |
| Date: | 2001-06-12 17:30:27 |
| Message-ID: | 3705826352029646A3E91C53F7189E32016670@sectorbase2.sectorbase.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Here are some disadvantages to using a "trigger based" approach:
>
> 1) Triggers simply transfer individual data items when they
> are modified, they do not keep track of transactions.
I don't know about other *async* replication engines but Rserv
keeps track of transactions (if I understood you corectly).
Rserv transfers not individual modified data items but
*consistent* snapshot of changes to move slave database from
one *consistent* state (when all RI constraints satisfied)
to another *consistent* state.
> 4) The activation of triggers in a database cannot be easily
> rolled back or undone.
What do you mean?
Vadim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | P. Dwayne Miller | 2001-06-12 17:36:02 | Migration from FoxPro |
| Previous Message | Dominic J. Eidson | 2001-06-12 17:29:04 | Re: Patch to include PAM support... |