If you are using Oracle, then replication is a very very extreme step to need.

All your redo logs are archived, and if you have a DBA worth their
salt, they are duplicated across at least two separate spindle groups
on two separate controllers to prevent controller death killing them.

This means that your database can roll forward from your last complete
backup short of anything but a catastrophic event.  The archive redo
logs can be pulled over the network periodically too to decrease time
to failure point.  I don't know that many places that want to spend
the money for full on remote site 'replication' for some value of
replication.  Hell, most places I know will shove a database on a
10-14 drive RAID 5 and then wonder why their data goes away one day
all of a sudden, and of course, they never tested the backups, so
their last good backup was three months ago.  Heck, most places run
MySQL becuase it's 'Open Source' and don't even bother to make sure
all the tables are InnoDB and have foreign keys.  God help them when
they wake up and find out MySQL dosen't support check constraints or a
variety of other rather important things to make sure your data isn't
screwed.

The day most people actually worry about replication, is the day I'll
quit my job because the man got a clue and won't need me any more to
clean up the mess his stupid ass 'decision' left behind.

Alex

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Christian
Catchpole<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> And that leads us to the next dilemma that all databases face.
> Replication.
>
> On Jul 17, 2:50 pm, Rick <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think one of the reasons that relational databases are popular as
>> compared to other solutions is that they map well to the theoretical
>> tools, such as relational algebra/calculus.
>>
>> For an upcoming e-commerce project I suggested trying out couchDB (as
>> promoted by the posse) and sCouchDB (the Scala version of same?)....
>> and a friend with an architectural leaning asked something along the
>> lines of:
>>
>> "but can you guarantee atomicity?"
>>
>> which shut me up pretty quickly.
>>
>> Disclaimer: I'm a fan of EJB 3.0
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to