[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Reinoud van Leeuwen) writes:
> Well as I read back the thread I see 2 different approaches to
> replication:
> ...
> I can think of some scenarios where I would definitely want to
> *choose* one of the options.
Yes. IIRC, it looks to be possible to support a form of async
repl
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 15:50:09 +0200, you wrote:
>
>> Here are some disadvantages to using a "trigger based" approach:
>>
>> 1) Triggers simply transfer individual data items when they
>> are modified, they do not keep track of transactions.
>> 2) The execution of triggers within a database impos
> Imho an implementation that opens a separate client connection to the
> replication target is only suited for async replication, and for that a
WAL
> based solution would probably impose less overhead.
Yes there is significant overhead with opening a connection to a
client, so Postgres-R c
