Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp
От | J. Andrew Rogers |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2EF9A1CC-C878-4A9D-AC5E-072846CD9F9F@neopolitan.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp (Richard Troy <rtroy@ScienceTools.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Feb 8, 2007, at 8:41 PM, Richard Troy wrote: > It'd be great if Jan considers the blending of replication; any > given DB > instance shouldn't be only a master/originator or only a slave/ > subscriber. > A solution that lets you blend replication strategies in a single > db is, > from my point of view, very important. It might be constructive to define what a minimal "complete" set of replication primitives actually is in addition to which ones should be implemented. In addition to master/slave models, you have Paxos algorithms and dynamic reconfiguration models in literature that can utilize many of the same primitives but which are very different in implementation. I see the value of Jan's proposal, but perhaps it would be better to step back and make some assertions about the nature of the core capabilities that will be supported in some broader picture. Having a theoretically (mostly) complete set of usable primitives would be an incredibly powerful feature set. Cheers, J. Andrew Rogers jrogers@neopolitan.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: