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
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 number of
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
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 way does
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
command
It could
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 Slony is
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
which fire
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-based one ?
A
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
some extra
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,
No, we
10 matches
Mail list logo