Received: from localhost (pluto.hub.org [200.46.204.4]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9DE9FA47B for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:23:54 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.4]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32838-08 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:23:45 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from momjian.us (momjian.us [70.90.9.53]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD50E9FA3AD for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:21:59 -0400 (AST) Received: (from bruce@localhost) by momjian.us (8.11.6/8.11.6) id kAM406q21873; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 23:00:06 -0500 (EST) From: Bruce Momjian Message-Id: <200611220400.kAM406q21873@momjian.us> Subject: Re: "Clustering" In-Reply-To: <4562C9F3.9020300@bluegap.ch> To: Markus Schiltknecht Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 23:00:06 -0500 (EST) CC: Peter Eisentraut , pgsql-docs@postgresql.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL123] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200611/67 X-Sequence-Number: 3901 Markus Schiltknecht wrote: > Hi, > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> The heading "Multi-Master Replication Using Clustering" doesn't make > >> sense to me. Clustering is bunching more than host together to achieve > >> a common goal. Thus multimaster replication may be a way to achieve > >> clustering, but clustering is not a way to achieve multimaster > >> replication. I don't actually see clustering defined in the > >> documentation. Can someone explain the categorization? > > AFAICS, clustering seems to have no clear definition within database > replication. OK, new title is "Synchonous Multi-Master Replication", and the next heading is "Asynchronous Multi-Master Replication". > > > I used the term clustering to mean that the servers work closely > > together. This is not as true with the other items on the page that are > > not clustering. > > Why not simply call in "Multi Master Replication"? That implies > clustering, doesn't it? Well, not really because of the async multi-master that is the next item. > > Perhaps you meant a Shared Nothing Cluster by referring to clustering? > Such a definition would make more sense. > > BTW, I'm slowly beginning to accept that you don't want to mix > "Statement-Based Replication Middleware" with "Multi Master > Replication". ;-) OK, are they mixed now? > >> (FWIW, I think "Clustering For Parallel Query Execution" later in the > >> list is an appropriate use of the term.) > > That reminds me of the requirement of having Multi Master Replication in > place to do Parallel Query Execution. Sync Multi Master Replication > being better, while Async Multi Master Replication obviously leads to > inconsistent responses, when queried in parallel. That may be acceptable > in certain situations. OK, I think we have that covered now. > Again, IMHO, "Parallel Query Execution" says everything. The word > 'Clustering' does not help, because it's not defined nor commonly used > in any helpful way (probably besides marketing). OK, new title is Multi-Server Parallel Query Execution. If I have just "Parallel Query Execution", it could be multi-process parallel query execution. -- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +