Re: PostgreSQL in the press again

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Thomas Hallgren <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL in the press again
Date: 2004-11-09 21:04:04
Message-ID: 200411092204.04667.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Master + read-only slaves:
> - Slony-I when all sites are trusted
> - dbMirror for untrusted slaves and/or table based master slave
> assignment - Mammoth Replicator, proprietary ???
> - erServer ???

That begs the question in turn why there are so many master/slave
replication solutions. I mean, I don't care, but this categorization
doesn't really answer the original question.

> Multi-master:
> - C-JDBC, Will be transaction safe once PostgreSQL has XA
> - pgPool, not transaction safe ???

These are not multimaster solutions in the sense that you can write to
any one of multiple hosts. In a sense, they are really master/slave
solutions with the program components distributed differently. To
write, you always have to go through one host.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2004-11-09 21:26:14 Re: Final Copy Edit: Press Release, Page
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2004-11-09 20:45:03 Re: Final Copy Edit: Press Release, Page