Chris Browne wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Huxton) writes:

http://www.slony.info/

But it is worth noting one thing about the synchronization...

Slony-I's strategy is pretty simple: One node is considered the
"master," and the other node is forcibly made to conform to what is on
the master.

If you want to synchronize back and forth (e.g. - multimaster
replication of some sort), Slony-I is not suitable...

Except in the case when you can have separate tables for the data. If you have a london_sales table only updated in London and a paris_sales table only updated in Paris then you have something inching towards multi-master.

--
  Richard Huxton
  Archonet Ltd

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to