From: | Eugene Ogurtsov <eogurtsov(at)swsoft(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Craig A(dot) James" <cjames(at)emolecules(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Replication |
Date: | 2007-06-15 02:17:46 |
Message-ID: | 4671F6CA.2090908@swsoft.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
What about "Daffodil Replicator" - GPL -
http://sourceforge.net/projects/daffodilreplica/
--
Thanks,
Eugene Ogurtsov
Internal Development Chief Architect
SWsoft, Inc.
Craig A. James wrote:
> Looking for replication solutions, I find:
>
> Slony-I
> Seems good, single master only, master is a single point of failure,
> no good failover system for electing a new master or having a failed
> master rejoin the cluster. Slave databases are mostly for safety or
> for parallelizing queries for performance. Suffers from O(N^2)
> communications (N = cluster size).
>
> Slony-II
> Seems brilliant, a solid theoretical foundation, at the forefront of
> computer science. But can't find project status -- when will it be
> available? Is it a pipe dream, or a nearly-ready reality?
>
> PGReplication
> Appears to be a page that someone forgot to erase from the old GBorg
> site.
>
> PGCluster
> Seems pretty good, but web site is not current, there are releases in
> use
> that are not on the web site, and also seems to always be a couple steps
> behind the current release of Postgres. Two single-points failure
> spots,
> load balancer and the data replicator.
>
> Is this a good summary of the status of replication? Have I missed
> any important solutions or mischaracterized anything?
>
> Thanks!
> Craig
>
> (Sorry about the premature send of this message earlier, please ignore.)
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-06-15 02:37:07 | Re: Replication |
Previous Message | Craig James | 2007-06-15 01:44:52 | Re: Replication |