Re: postgresql-R

Hey Jim,
Thanks again for the pointer to this.  I've already compiled and
installed on one of the two Solaris nodes, that I needed to.  Yeah upon
further reading, I can't wait for Slony-II to come out - is there truth
behind the "anyday" rumor? - is it also true that it's going to
implement the true multi-master scenario, where updates can be made at
any of the clustered nodes.

I'm going to deploy the "slon worker process" locally on every
participating node, rather than letting the master host the "slon"
processes for every cluster participant, for performance reasons.

I will also join the Slony mailing list, very cool stuff.


         Kind Regards,


Jim Nasby wrote:

> On Mar 7, 2006, at 2:58 PM, Louis Gonzales wrote:
>
>> Based on:
>> Postgres based Replication Projects
>>
>> PG Replication
>> Postgres-R: Dr. Kemme's Site, Paper, Publications, Replication  Work,
>> The Horus Project and Emsemble
>> DRAGON: Database Replication based on Group Communication
>> The Slony-1 Project
>> PGCluster
>> DBBalancer
>> PostgreSQL Replicator: Tutorial, Paper, Techdocs
>> eRServer: Techdocs
>> DBMirror: Will be in the 7.3 contrib directory.
>> Usogres: Techdocs
>> From:  http://gborg.postgresql.org/project/pgreplication/
>> genpage.php?replication_research
>> I was under the impression that "Postgres-R" - I misspelled it as
>> "postgresql-R" - is a database clustering software.  I downloaded
>> the sources for this and it's supposed to work with "spread."  I
>> apologize if I'm mistaken?
>
>
> Well, AfAIK it's quasi-clustering. I'd describe it as a mix between
> sync and async multi-master replication. Its concepts are the basis
> behind Slony-II AFAIK.
>
>> I will certainly take a look into Slony-1, as you suggest.  Did you
>> have any good links to this?  Have you gone through an install on
>> Solaris 9 w/Postgresl v8.0?
>>
>> WAN != LAN, where my database server is not in the same city as the
>> target system to cluster with; for my worse case scenario, could be
>> from east coast to west coast.
>
>
> The issues you'll run into are that in a high-load scenario, the
> latency on that link could become a real issue, as could bandwidth
> (actually, bandwidth is probably the bigger issue). The other
> downside is that slony is decidedly async; if you have to fail over
> you're probably going to lose some recently committed data. As long
> as that's not an issue then it's your best bet. If it is an issue,
> you'll probably be stuck rolling your own solution using something
> like 2PC.
>
> You should hop on the slony mailing list if you have any questions
> about it.
> --
> Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
> Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
> vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461
>