Ellie, Thanks for the clarification.
Is there any issue tracking the advance of this feature? If not, should I create one on github? Just having enough info on the current state and needed changes could attract 3rd-party contributions and testing. I'd definitely try to test it if I knew the exact current state, what's missing and what to expect. Regards, Anatoli On 20/4/21 21:24, ellie timoney wrote: > Hi Anatoli, > >> Ellie, could you please let us, the users, know if the changes needed >> to implement master-master replication are included in this release? > > If it were clear to me that master-master replication was now safe, I would > have listed it as a feature in the release notes. ;) > > I'm not directly certain what is or isn't remaining to make this work, but, > it's worth observing that even if the right code is now in place, afaik > nobody has used it in this way, so I'm not going to tell people they should > start relying on it. > > If you're willing to experiment on the side, it might work with bugs (which > can be fixed once found), or it might not be complete (and such limitations > can be addressed once identified). Either way, feedback from actual usage > would be very useful! > > But for production purposes, I would assume that 3.4 does not support > master-master replication, and stick with the traditional replication schemes. > > Cheers, > > ellie ------------------------------------------ Cyrus: Info Permalink: https://cyrus.topicbox.com/groups/info/T752c02e75bc26013-Mbaedd612db7dc4e466789234 Delivery options: https://cyrus.topicbox.com/groups/info/subscription
