| From: | "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | AgentM <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Replication |
| Date: | 2006-08-21 19:35:44 |
| Message-ID: | 20060821153544.810a00a5.darcy@druid.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:14:10 -0400
AgentM <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com> wrote:
> > My experience is that any replication needs to be based on your
> > business
> > rules which will vary widely.
>
> Sure- and more specifically, replication rules may differ on every
> table according to those rules. The current solutions are on/off for
In fact this is exactly what I did for my app. Some tables were
multi-master and some were required to be modified from a single master.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2006-08-21 19:40:21 | Re: [HACKERS] BF Failure on Bandicoot |
| Previous Message | Alexander Kirpa | 2006-08-21 19:25:34 | Re: PostgreSQL on 64 bit Linux |