Re: Batch replication ordering (was Re: [GENERAL] 32/64-bit
От | Dennis Gearon |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Batch replication ordering (was Re: [GENERAL] 32/64-bit |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3E9B091A.2E76F7E9@cvc.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | 32/64-bit transaction IDs? ("Ed L." <pgsql@bluepolka.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Batch replication ordering (was Re: [GENERAL] 32/64-bit
|
Список | pgsql-general |
I saw somewhere on this thread that there is no way to tell when something is committed. that really doesn't make sense, since postgres is a MVCC system. Doesn't the versioning automatically supply commit times? "Ed L." wrote: > > On Monday April 14 2003 12:20, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 06:34:53PM -0400, Jan Wieck wrote: > > > A) You apply those changes in the order you read them out of the master > > > on the slave. This requires that you do it all in one big transaction > > > on > > > > > > B) You read all the changes across all tables, but regroup them into > > > their correct order and original transaction boundaries for playback on > > > > > > B2) You read all the changes across all tables simultaneously via > > > cursors. Worst case you need as many cursors as you have tables and > > > it's > > > > What I am confused about is why one needs to apply now-superseded > > transactions on the slave at all. Don't you just want a > > (serializable, mind) snapshot of the master to be applied to the > > slave? > > I'd say, yes, if the process of creating such a snapshot is not overly > intensive or lengthy. IMO, this is one potentially significant drawback of > the dbmirror approach in general. The upside to dbmirror is that its > pretty straight-forward, works pretty well for certain situations, it's > open source, and it's free. > > I know rserv/erServer are reported to use the snapshot approach. But rserv > didn't work at all for me without mods and looks very much like an > abandoned prototype for eRServer. ERServer, its successor, is done in part > by Vadim M. who if I'm not mistaken did an excellent job with MVCC. But, > at least as of Feb 28, 2003, eRServer was $10,000 minimum, closed source, > doesn't replicate DDL either, doesn't release trial versions, and has no > plans to support Redhat 8.0. For us, that was more than enough incentive > to investigate the alternatives. > > I think that'd be a great improvement for dbmirror, along with DDL > replication. > > Opinions on a better *currently available* option? > > Ed > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: