Re: [Pgcluster-general] PostgreSQL Documentation of

From: Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, a(dot)mitani(at)sra-europe(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgcluster-general(at)pgfoundry(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Pgcluster-general] PostgreSQL Documentation of
Date: 2006-11-21 22:31:24
Message-ID: 45637E3C.7010707@bluegap.ch
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 16:51 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>> I feel the shared-* issue splits us up like master/slave and
>>>> multi-master splits up
>>> No, not quite. To sum up, I'd say the following combinations make sense:
>>>
>>> sync, multi-master replication on shared-memory cluster (which is much
>>> like a super-computer. With shared memory distributing locks does not
>>> cost much - beside marketing, there is probably not much sense in
>>> calling this a cluster at all).
>> Wow, how is that different than an multi-CPU server?
>
> You can't have 1000 cpus :).. You can have 1000 dual core servers.

Have them share all their memory is the challenge, though. Ask IBM, they
certainly do big-irons like that.

As I said, it's like a super-computer, but you can also see it as a
cluster of CPUs with shared memory and shared disks. It's all just a
matter of your point of view.

Regards

Markus

In response to

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Markus Schiltknecht 2006-11-21 22:35:35 Re: [Pgcluster-general] PostgreSQL Documentation of
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2006-11-21 21:57:53 Re: [Pgcluster-general] PostgreSQL Documentation of