Re: Replication on the backend

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Gustavo Tonini <gustavotonini(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Replication on the backend
Date: 2005-12-06 05:35:43
Message-ID: 4395232F.50607@Yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/5/2005 8:18 PM, Gustavo Tonini wrote:

> replication (master/slave, multi-master, etc) implemented inside
> postgres...I would like to know what has been make in this area.

We do not plan to implement replication inside the backend. Replication
needs are so diverse that pluggable replication support makes a lot more
sense. To me it even makes more sense than keeping transaction support
outside of the database itself and add it via pluggable storage add-on.

Jan

>
> Gustavo.
>
> P.S. Sorry for my bad English.
>
> 2005/12/5, Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>:
>>
>> gustavotonini(at)gmail(dot)com (Gustavo Tonini) writes:
>> > What about replication or data distribution inside the backend. This
>> > is a valid issue?
>>
>> I'm not sure what your question is...
>> --
>> (reverse (concatenate 'string "gro.gultn" "@" "enworbbc"))
>> http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/x.html
>> "Love is like a snowmobile flying over the frozen tundra that suddenly
>> flips, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come."
>> -- Matt Groening
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
>> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>>
>

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Fuhr 2005-12-06 05:51:12 Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-12-06 05:29:33 Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working