Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 418EE9FA1DA; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:50:55 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 07765-08; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 23:50:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (noel.decibel.org [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9F1D9F95CB; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:50:49 -0300 (ADT) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6D95B56459; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:50:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1001); Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:50:45 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:50:45 -0500 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: Bruce Momjian Cc: PostgreSQL-documentation , PostgreSQL-development Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Replication documentation addition Message-ID: <20061024235045.GX26892@nasby.net> References: <200610240339.k9O3dYh19144@momjian.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200610240339.k9O3dYh19144@momjian.us> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p10 amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:bruce@momjian.us::g4KX4U0d4r3r3kDn:02tAo X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:pgsql-docs@postgresql.org::Z+CFSiOrM4nrknKS:000000000000 0000000000000000000000002ndB X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org::q+74Z/hMAM1KskbR:000000000 0000000000000000000000003A3M X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.72 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=SARE_SPEC_REPLICA X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200610/58 X-Sequence-Number: 3779 On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 11:39:34PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Query Broadcast Replication > --------------------------- > > This involves sending write queries to multiple servers. Read-only > queries can be sent to a single server because there is no need for all > servers to process it. This can be complex to setup because functions > like random() and CURRENT_TIMESTAMP will have different values on > different servers, and sequences should be consistent across servers. > Pgpool implements this type of replication. Isn't there another active project that does this besides pgpool? It's probably also worth mentioning the commercial replication schemes that are out there. -- Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)