Hi,

Jim Nasby wrote:
Note that those terms only make sense if you limit yourself to thinking the master is pushing data out to the slave...


I don't really get the "limitation" here. It's all about distinguishing between master/slave, origin/replica, local/remote - however you want to call it.

I think it'd make the most sense if the name reflected whether the trigger should be fired by a replication process or not; that way it doesn't really matter if it's a master or a slave...

I think you are mixing the meaning of multi-master replication vs. a per-transaction 'master' (local transaction / origin node of the txn), which then propagates this transaction to the 'slaves' (remote/replica) of that transaction. This does not have anything to do with the more general multi-master vs. single-master replication distinction, as even in multi-master replication, each transaction must have a 'local' or 'origin' node.

Regards

Markus


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
      choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
      match

Reply via email to