Re: [GENERAL] Re: replication

From: Richard Welsh <rwelsh(at)OneStepInternet(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)hub(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Re: replication
Date: 1999-11-16 20:41:23
Message-ID: 008601bf3072$f2593200$6301a8c0@laptop.local
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Is it possible to log the transactions ( as complete statements ) on one
database then process the logged transactions on the second database at
intervals to keep it up to date?

RDW.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Hoffmann <jeff(at)propertykey(dot)com>
To: Aaron J. Seigo <aaron(at)gtv(dot)ca>; pgsql-general(at)hub(dot)org
<pgsql-general(at)hub(dot)org>
Date: November 16, 1999 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Re: replication

>"Aaron J. Seigo" wrote:
>
>> this needs to be in the back end... otherwise, if you have multiple
people
>> performing updates on different replicated servers, how can you guarentee
>> concurancy? how do you manage the differences between read-only and
updateable
>> replicants? (this can be done using your wrapper method, but quickly gets
>> clumsy)
>
>yeah it can get clumsy, but fortunately updates are pretty rare in my
>case (and usually only performed by one person) so i don't really worry
>about those issues, but i should. the only safety issue i use is
>starting a transaction for each connection, perform the action on all of
>the databases, and then commit the transaction on each. it's not bad
>unless one of the commits fails and the others don't, then i have to
>retry the failed ones & hope it works. i don't know how to fix it if i
>had to give up on one of the transactions for a mirror. again, not
>perfect, but it works pretty well for me & my simpler cases.
>
>************
>
>

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Boris Goldowsky 1999-11-16 21:16:05 concurrency
Previous Message Jeff Hoffmann 1999-11-16 19:33:02 Re: [GENERAL] Re: replication