Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL

Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> The whole single-threaded WAL replay problem is going to rear it's ugly
> head here too, and mean that a slave *won't* be able to keep up with a
> busy master if it's actually trying to apply all the changes in
> real-time.
Is there a reason to commit at the same points that the master 
committed?  Wouldn't relaxing
that mean that at least you would get 'big' commits and some economy of 
scale?  It might
not be too bad.  All I can say is that Sybase warm standby is useful, 
even though the rep
for an update that changes a hundred rows is a hundred updates keyed on 
primary key,
which is pretty sucky in terms of T-SQL performance.