Each distant database works on its own domain of data. Then no conflict should happen during updates.
One thing I have not specified is that the distant databases don't handle global data but only data collected at the
locallevel.
Slony-1 seems not to provide replication from multi-partial databases to one global database. But maybe I'm wrong...
Canyou tell me more about this use of Slony?
Hugues
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Scott Marlowe [mailto:smarlowe@g2switchworks.com]
Envoyé : vendredi 5 mai 2006 19:10
À : Houssais Hugues
Cc : pgsql general
Objet : Re: [GENERAL] Unify distant Postgres databases
On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 04:21, Houssais Hugues wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We desire to implement a multi-site server that unifies data from
> distant Postgres databases in a nightly batch. The distant databases
> have all the same architecture (schema). The size of data exchanged
> between distant servers and the multi-site manager has to be reduced
> to the strictly usefully data.
>
> We naturally have been interested by the WAL archiving (PITR). But
> after a deep analysis of this skill, we still encounter problems. The
> main problem is unifying the data from many databases in a common
> database.
>
> Has anyone experienced a solution to this problem... maybe not with
> WAL?
Are you talking a big multi-way setup? That's rather complex, and
resolution of conflicting updates can keep a DBA busy full time in a
poorly thought out setup.
OTOH, if you're looking at having one or more one-way pushes in your
setup, you might want to look at using slony. There are a lot of ways
you can set it up, depending on your needs. Got a bit more detail on
what you're wanting to do?