Here is some data on Postgres replication:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Replication,_Clustering,_and_Connection_Pooling
It was Bucardo I was looking at a year ago or so, it looked promising.
-- 
Matt Warnock <[email protected]>
RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.

On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 10:43 -0600, Brett Palmer wrote:
> David,
> 
> I like postgres for the reason you have mentioned.
> 
> The number one reason we use MySQL in some of our deployments is because its
> replication solution is very good.  You can replicate your data from the
> database very quickly.  We do this for database backups in production as
> well as creating reporting servers.
> 
> I have not been able to find a good replication solution for postgres.  Its
> been a while since I looked but the last time I investigated replication I
> couldn't find any.
> 
> 
> Brett
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 4:19 PM, David E Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> >
> > On Aug 12, 2010, at 3:21 PM, James McGill wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> This is why I prefer to use PostGres but that's another story and of
> > course
> > >> the same problem could occur at the ms level, 1000 time less though...
> > >>
> > >> Jacques
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > I was hoping you would post to tell me I was wrong, and  point out the
> > > locking semantics in the delegator that the application can use.
> > >
> > > My current plan is to extend the delegator and minilang so that "findOne"
> > > and <entity-one> can have a "for update" parameter, so that at least the
> > > application can decide to do a select for update, to introduce some
> > locking
> > > to avoid concurrency bugs.
> > >
> > > Right now, it's fairly common to for us to issue inventory items until
> > the
> > > quantity goes below zero, because there's no way to regulate concurrency
> > > between two threads that want to issue.   There are many parts of the
> > system
> > > where this might not be such a problem, but on InventoryItem it's a
> > > potential nightmare.
> > >
> > > What do you think about my idea of giving the delegator a "select for
> > > update"  option?
> >
> > Adding a for-update option is a good idea, and is something I have
> > incorporated into the Moqui design.
> >
> > As Jacques mentioned chances are you'll still have a better experience with
> > Postgres when it comes to concurrency issues, in the way they manage
> > transactions and locking in addition to the timestamp resolution issue.
> >
> > I honestly don't know why so many people like MySQL compared to Postgres,
> > but I know that many people do.  Maybe it's the greater marketing budget of
> > corporate-driven MySQL versus the more community-driven Postgres. It's also
> > a shame that when SAP DB was scavenged for useful things to go into MySQL
> > that it wasn't done the other way around, ie take useful things from MySQL
> > and put them into SAP DB. Of course, I haven't looked into the state of
> > either code base before this was done, but I do know which organization
> > acquired the other and that probably drove the direction for the software
> > (it's bad marketing to come out and say you're tossing most of your main
> > software stack to go forward with another).
> >
> > I could certainly be wrong, and if any MySQL fans out there want to help me
> > understand why maybe it will even make it through my shield of bias.
> >
> > -David
> >
> >

Reply via email to