Re: What do Oracle, DB2, etc. actually *do*?
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: What do Oracle, DB2, etc. actually *do*? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200503191013.25098.josh@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: What do Oracle, DB2, etc. actually *do*? (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: What do Oracle, DB2, etc. actually *do*?
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
Neil, William, > One solution to multi-master replication on slow networks (or networks > with nodes that are only intermittently connected) is to be very > asynchronous: transaction commit only affects the local node, and > conflict resolution is done when replicating changes later. This is more > useful for filesystem replication: it is easier to do after-the-fact > conflict resolution, although it is still very complex. ISTM it should > be possible with DBMS replication, at least in theory. Actually, Sybase tackles this issue a different way .... one that, I may add, could be done with Slony-I with a little back-end glue. Basically, they make each replicated node the "master" of one subset of data; for example, if it's a personnel database, then all personnel records for each office location are "mastered" at that office location. If you're updating records at your current location (which is assumed to be the majority of updates) it goes in direct and cascades out to the other servers; if you update records for a different office, it goes to their server across the wire and cascades back to you asynchronously. Obviously, this only works for distributed applications where such partitioning of data is reasonable, but that actually covers a lot of real-world WAN distributed databases. Point-of-Sale, for example, as well as HR. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: