On 2/6/07, Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Feb 5, 2007, at 12:53 PM, Andrew Hammond wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2:38 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) wrote:
>> Rick Gigger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> I thought that the following todo item just barely missed 8.2:
>>> "Allow a warm standby system to also allow read-only statements
>>> [pitr]
>>
>> No, it's a someday-wishlist item; the work involved is not small.
>
> Slony1 has supported log-shipping replication for about a year now. It
> provides similar functionality.
Not really....
1) It's not possible for a PITR 'slave' to fall behind to a state
where it will never catch up, unless it's just on inadequate
hardware. Same isn't true with slony.
I imagine that there are ways to screw up WAL shipping too, but there
are plenty more ways to mess up slony.
2) PITR handles DDL seamlessly
3) PITR is *much* simpler to configure and maintain
4) You need 3 databases to do log shipping using slony1. An origin, a
subscriber which generates the logs and obviously the log-replica.
All of which is why I qualified my statement with "similar".
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
