Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > We don't use either a log table in database or WAL. The data to
> > replicate is stored in disk files, one per transaction.
>
> Clever :)
>
> How well does it scale ? That is, at what transaction rate can your
> replication keep up with database ?
This depend on a numbe
Ühel kenal päeval, R, 2007-10-12 kell 12:39, kirjutas Alexey Klyukin:
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> > > We have hooks in executor calling our own collecting functions, so we
> > > don't need the trigger machinery to launch replication.
> >
> > But where do you store the collected info - in your own
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > We have hooks in executor calling our own collecting functions, so we
> > don't need the trigger machinery to launch replication.
>
> But where do you store the collected info - in your own replication_log
> table, or do reuse data in WAL you extract it on master befor
>
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 21:58:45 +0300
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > We have hooks in executor calling our own collecting functions, so
> > we don't need the trigger machinery to launch replication.
>
> But where do you store the collected info - in your own
> replication_log table,
Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2007-10-11 kell 18:25, kirjutas Alexey Klyukin:
> Hello,
>
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
> >
> > Here come my questions :
> >
> > >From looking at http://www.commandprompt.com/images/MR_components.jpg it
> > seems that you don't do replication just from WAL logs, but also collect
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 19:10:18 +0300
Alexey Klyukin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marko Kreen wrote:
> > On 10/11/07, Alexey Klyukin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > > > For what use cases do you think your WAL-based approach is
> > > > better than Slony/Skytools trigger-base
Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 10/11/07, Alexey Klyukin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > > For what use cases do you think your WAL-based approach is better than
> > > Slony/Skytools trigger-based one ?
> >
> > A pure trigger based approach can only replicate data for the commands
>
On 10/11/07, Alexey Klyukin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > For what use cases do you think your WAL-based approach is better than
> > Slony/Skytools trigger-based one ?
>
> A pure trigger based approach can only replicate data for the commands
> which fire triggers. AFAIK Slo
Alexey Klyukin wrote:
>
>
>> For what use cases do you think your WAL-based approach is better than
>> Slony/Skytools trigger-based one ?
>>
>
> A pure trigger based approach can only replicate data for the commands
> which fire triggers. AFAIK Slony is unable to replicate TRUNCATE
> comman
Hello,
Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> Here come my questions :
>
> >From looking at http://www.commandprompt.com/images/MR_components.jpg it
> seems that you don't do replication just from WAL logs, but also collect
> some extra info inside postgreSQL server. Is this so ?
>
> If it is, then in what wa
>
> btw, can you publicly discuss how CommandPrompts WAL-based
> replication works ?
It's my company, if course I am ;)... but not in this thread. If you
are interested feel free to email me directly or start a new thread.
Good :)
Here come my questions :
>From looking at http://www.commandp
11 matches
Mail list logo