Mon Jan 18 12:20:45 PST 2010
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] can slony break a transaction with trigger?
- Next message: [Slony1-general] can slony break a transaction with trigger?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 1/18/2010 11:51 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 07:07:30PM +0300, Nickolay wrote: >> PostgreSQL 8.3.5 > > I note an awful lot of fixes after that in the 8.3.x branch. Are you > quite sure you don't have a data-loss problem in Postgres? I barely > scanned the release notes & nothing leaped out at me, but that would > be the first thing I'd fix. Note that a response of, "But this only > happens when I'm doing Slony things," is not going to get a > sympathetic hearing: Slony is already working at the limits of > Postgres functionality, and it will exercise parts of the system that > you won't. If there's a serious problem fixed by the four subsequent > minor 8.3 releases, I'll bet a pretty good lunch Slony will tickle it. > > (This isn't to say that _is_ the problem, but I think you should rule > it out first.) As a general rule of thumb, nothing (not even slony) is supposed to be even able to break transactional integrity. It is PostgreSQL's job to deny that under all circumstances. Jan -- Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security. -- Benjamin Franklin
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] can slony break a transaction with trigger?
- Next message: [Slony1-general] can slony break a transaction with trigger?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list