On Jun 22, 2009, at 4:53 PM, Gerry Reno wrote:
> I noticed that the user survey on the community page does not list
> replication among the choices for development priority. For me,
> replication is the most important thing that is critically missing
> from postgresql. We need something as good as MySQL Replication.
> Both statement-based and row-based replication. And support for
> Master-Master and full cyclic replication setups. Postgresql is
> just a toy database without this as far as I am concerned.
>
> Regards,
> Gerry
>
Google postgresql replication. There are multiple replication /
clustering options depending on you needs. It's not built in to the
DB nor should it be because everyone has different replication needs.
The idea of separating replication functionality from the core DB
product isn't new. AFAIK IBM has always done this on there big iron
based DB2. Granted their cheap replication software costs more then
you paid for that server that is running MySQL, and the expensive
replication probably costs more then a cabinet worth of MySQL
servers. :-)
--
Kevin Barnard
kevin.barnard@laser2mail.com