Re: What about SkyTools?

Still looking for a possible (more simple) replacement for Slony in the
background.

1. Seems SkyTools does not have an utility to spread DDL changes among all
the replicas (like slonik does). So, if I want to ALTER TABLE, I have to run
this command manually on each node?

2. The architecture of the system is not clear enough. What daemon should
run in what machine? Seems we must have one PgQ daemon on each machine
(master and all slaves), but should we have a londiste daemon on each
machine too or not? (If yes, we have to care about londiste configs
synchronization on all replicas, which is not very handy.)

Seems SkyTools developed for static schemas only, without an ability to
modify the schema.
Am I wrong?

On 4/12/07, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 11 April 2007 12:08, Dmitry Koterov wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > Have anybody used SkyTools in production environment?
> > What's the impression? In practice - is it now more preferrable than
> Slony
> > or not yet?
>
> Well, skype using them in production... I think the general consensus of
> the
> postgresql community is that slony is still the preferred choice, but on
> number of deployments and general community knowledge, assuming you need
> master/slave style replication. Everything else is still considered
> fairly
> green technology, though that's no reason not to test it in your
> environment.
> IMHO YMMV
>
> --
> Robert Treat
> Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>