Wed Nov 29 07:31:30 PST 2006
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Porting slony to allow oracle to be master (no slave required)
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Porting slony to allow oracle to be master (no slave required)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 04:03:43PM +0100, Csaba Nagy wrote: > So it all boils down on how the data is transferred, text or binary, and > strictly typed or not... The data is transferred as standard libpq; in principle, anything you can put in a regular SQL statement you oughta be able to get through Slony. There are some issues with datatype in/out conversions that occasionally bite one, note. That would be where the tricks are. As for the Oracle side, here is the central problem: you need to be very careful with visibility rules, and very careful in understanding exactly what you can capture in a given sync set. The details of this are one of the really clever parts in Slony-I (thanks to Jan), and I don't know to what extent a similar approach could be produced in Oracle (I'm not saying it can't be; just that I don't know Oracle well enough to say anything meaningful about it one way or the other). My suggestion is to look at the SPI code, the sync code, and the original concept/design doc all together, to get a clear idea of how it's supposed to work. If you do that, you can probably see where the hinky bits are, and then you can explore further the extent to which it's worth doing. I suspect that, from a community point of view, the design of such a beast would need a few additional things to be a candidate for inclusion with Slony. Off the top of my head, I'd say that at least a proposal for how to go the other way (from Postgres to Oracle) would be very nice, the option to turn it off at build time (or, more likely, an --enable-oracle-compat or something), and some outline of what limitations the additional support would impose (I bet there are datatypes that _will_ have problems, and we'd need to catch those somehow). The goal of all of that is to avoid having pieces of the code that are very "bare metal". Slony has the number of safeguards it does precisely because we concluded previous systems were too easy to use as devices for self-inflicted injury; and we still get things that people do to themselves where the docs say DON'T DO THIS ON PAIN OF FOOT SHOT. A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs at crankycanuck.ca A certain description of men are for getting out of debt, yet are against all taxes for raising money to pay it off. --Alexander Hamilton
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Porting slony to allow oracle to be master (no slave required)
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Porting slony to allow oracle to be master (no slave required)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list