| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mike Christensen <mike(at)kitchenpc(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: peer-to-peer replication with Postgres |
| Date: | 2010-05-11 02:14:35 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTiljxjsZY8oeYYwCx8KiWOgptAoS54nVn7Lpzs1n@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Mike Christensen <mike(at)kitchenpc(dot)com> wrote:
> The concept of updating one database and doing all your reads from
> another database is kinda confusing to me. Does that mean you have to
> design your whole app around that concept, have a different connection
> string and what not for your "writable" database and "read-only
> databases"? I'm using Castle ActiveRecord which I'm not even sure
> supports that (without a ton of custom code anyway).
>
> Is there any sort of abstraction layer (like in the driver level) that
> can abstract that and just make updates go to one DB and reads
> round-robin to other DBs? Hopefully there's a way to make this design
> simple to implement.
Pretty sure pgpool can do the "read from these dbs, write to this one".
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John R Pierce | 2010-05-11 02:59:09 | Re: peer-to-peer replication with Postgres |
| Previous Message | Mike Christensen | 2010-05-11 02:00:40 | Re: peer-to-peer replication with Postgres |