Re: High Availability, Load Balancing, and Replication Feature Matrix
От | Markus Schiltknecht |
---|---|
Тема | Re: High Availability, Load Balancing, and Replication Feature Matrix |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4746D3D2.2080809@bluegap.ch обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: High Availability, Load Balancing, and Replication Feature Matrix (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Список | pgsql-docs |
Hello Bruce, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Uh, to me the issue is something like pgpool and Sequoia, where the > _master_/replication is happening _outside_ the server Well, you are saying that the controllers are the masters and do replication. I can see the reasoning behind it: they are the only nodes which allow write access, seen from the outside. However, I don't consider these controllers to be masters nor slaves, because they don't carry a replica of the data. Instead I'm considering the database nodes which are (synchronously or not) processing the writing transactions on behalf of the controller to be the masters. They do all the work and the locking, and they carry the replicated data. PgCluster (and therefore Cybercluster, too) seem to follow my definition, as they are advertising themselves as multi-master replication solutions (even though they only support one single controller, AFAICT). I didn't find any self-definition of PgPool's replication feature nor Sequoias. However, I'd argue that both are generally considered synchronous multi-master replication solutions as well, even if there's only one controller. > vs something > like Oracle RAC where it is happening inside the server. ..or like Postgres-R :-) Regards Markus
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: