Mon Dec 10 04:27:50 PST 2007
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Delayed replication: Explicitly creating a slony-I backlog, and then telling the slon daemon to replicate changes all at once.
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Delayed replication: Explicitly creating a slony-I backlog, and then telling the slon daemon to replicate changes all at once.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 11:09:13PM +0000, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > David, > > Unfortunately, changes to the database may be quite varied. We > aren't talking about massive amounts of data though - in the order a > few dozen rows per update per slave. Confining that to a single > transaction isn't realistic, though. I don't know how to put this to you gently, but it doesn't seem to me that your design goals are terribly well thought-out. Could you explain in short simple words what's wrong with having Slony simply do its job, which is to ship out row changes at the transaction boundary? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david at fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter at gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Delayed replication: Explicitly creating a slony-I backlog, and then telling the slon daemon to replicate changes all at once.
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Delayed replication: Explicitly creating a slony-I backlog, and then telling the slon daemon to replicate changes all at once.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list