Andrew,
How would you handle a sequence that is accessed by more than one table?
We have an audit sequence that is accessed from most of our tables, so
combining the sequence into a single table set with all accessing tables
will make for a very large table set.

Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: slony1-general-bounces at lists.slony.info
[mailto:slony1-general-bounces at lists.slony.info] On Behalf Of Andrew
Sullivan
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 10:20 AM
To: slony1-general at lists.slony.info
Subject: Re: [Slony1-general] Recommenation against sequence
onlyreplication sets

On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 02:55:17PM -0400, Knight, Doug wrote:
> page of the Slony-I site, with no further explanation. Looking at the
> FAQ, section 5.5 the bug is mentioned again, with a note that it
"should
> be resolved some time after Slony-I 1.1.0". So first, what exactly is
> the bug, and second does this bug still exist in 1.2.14?

I don't know if the bug was fixed (or if it was fixable without really
bad performance effects), but the problem was that sequence-only sets
wouldn't replicate at all.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at commandprompt.com
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/
_______________________________________________
Slony1-general mailing list
Slony1-general at lists.slony.info
http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general