| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | AgentM <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Replication |
| Date: | 2006-08-21 15:40:16 |
| Message-ID: | 44E9D3E0.3000008@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>
>> It is very, very common to have asynchronous replication. I would say
>> the need for synchronous is far more limited (although greater desired).
>
> I would imagine that multi-master synchronous replication would be
> fairly trivial to implement with 2PC and wal-shipping available, no?
Trivial? I would say... no. There is a reason it hasn't been done yet,
and a reason why CMD (for example) has zero plans to even try.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Schiltknecht | 2006-08-21 15:44:30 | Re: Replication |
| Previous Message | AgentM | 2006-08-21 15:33:21 | Re: Replication |