Re: Synchronous replication & Hot standby patches

On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 22:17 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:

> > Well VLDB is like 2% of what we need. If the above will remove all the
> > B.S. currently associated with actually doing PITR (rsync, scp, nfs,
> > pg_standby pick your poison) then I am all for it.
>
> If you use walmgr.py, then all you need is writing a conf file and
> making sure that ssh and rsync work.
>
> Actually the best way to do Sync Rep would have been to just move to C
> what walmgr.py does. That the patch could have started off from a
> well-tested foundation.
>

For sync?

> > Log shipping should be:
> >
> > I am master, my slave is here.
> > I am slave, I understand my master is here.
> > Here is our mutual authentication love token.
> > Let congress begin.
> >
> > Anything more and we are being difficult for the sake of being
> > difficult.
>
> Actually I'd leave out the first line, and start with just
>
> - I am slave, my master accepts me, start replicationg
>

Heh fair enough.

> So there could be several slaves, of both hot standby postgresql,
> wal-file-store and store-and-forward-to-many types.

THat should be optional not the default.

Joshua D. Drake

--
PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake(at)jabber(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997