| From: | "Koichi Suzuki" <koichi(dot)szk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Stephen Denne" <Stephen(dot)Denne(at)datamail(dot)co(dot)nz>, "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)krosing(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2008-06-05 04:21:25 |
| Message-ID: | a778a7260806042121n4db0d490wa329d476419729a7@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
If the version of the master and the slave is different and we'd still
like to allow log shipping replication, we need a negotiation if WAL
format for the two is compatible. I hope it is not in our scope
and I'm worrying too much.
2008/6/5 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> "Koichi Suzuki" <koichi(dot)szk(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Well, WAL format doesn't only depend on WAL itself, but also depend on
>> each resource manager. If we introduce WAL format version
>> identification, ISTM that we have to take care of the matching of
>> resource manager in the master and the slave as well.
>
> That seems a bit overdesigned. What are the prospects that two builds
> of the same Postgres version are going to have different sets of
> resource managers in them?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
------
Koichi Suzuki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-06-05 11:08:14 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2008-06-05 02:17:59 | Re: Brochures for upcoming shows (was Re: Live CDs for upcoming shows) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mayuresh Nirhali | 2008-06-05 05:14:23 | orafce does NOT build with Sun Studio compiler |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-06-05 03:59:27 | Re: Proposal: new function array_init |