Re: Replication with non-read-only standby.

From: Sylvain Marechal <marechal(dot)sylvain2(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Nick Babadzhanian <nb(at)cobra(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Replication with non-read-only standby.
Date: 2016-07-06 20:00:05
Message-ID: CAJu=pHSxqPNkiwO1g6GHMc+QP8ncCr9MR89yvh_xtHWY9hVLyA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

2016-06-30 15:15 GMT+02:00 Nick Babadzhanian <nb(at)cobra(dot)ru>:

> Setup:
> 2 PostgreSQL servers are geographically spread. The first one is used for
> an application that gathers data. It is connected to the second database
> that is used to process the said data. Connection is not very stable nor is
> it fast, so using Bidirectional replication is not an option. It is OK if
> data is shipped in batches rather than streamed.
>
> Question:
> Is there a way to make the standby server non-read-only, so that it can
> keep getting updates (mostly inserts) from the 'master', but users are able
> to edit the data stored on 'slave'? Is there some alternative solution to
> this?
>
> Regards,
> Nick.
>
> Hi Nick,

sorry for this silly question, but I am not sure to understand why BDR is
not an option.
As far as I know, it was designed to handle such cases.

My 2 cents,
Sylvain

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message arnaud gaboury 2016-07-06 21:13:40 Re: Broken after upgrade
Previous Message John R Pierce 2016-07-06 18:56:51 Re: Broken after upgrade