X-Original-To: pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C59614B2800 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 10:31:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18517-06 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 13:31:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp102.mail.sc5.yahoo.com (smtp102.mail.sc5.yahoo.com [216.136.174.140]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 846BE14B2821 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 10:31:50 -0300 (ADT) Received: from unknown (HELO jupiter.black-lion.info) (janwieck@68.80.245.191 with login) by smtp102.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Aug 2004 13:31:53 -0000 Received: from [172.21.8.18] (ismtp.afilias.com [216.217.55.254]) (authenticated bits=0) by jupiter.black-lion.info (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i79DVp3v068574; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 09:31:52 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from JanWieck@Yahoo.com) Message-ID: <41177CBE.7070803@Yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 09:31:42 -0400 From: Jan Wieck User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.1) Gecko/20040707 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Joshua D. Drake" Cc: schen@graciousstyle.com, pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: replication References: <4113BB1C.9020106@graciousstyle.com> <4113C627.9030205@commandprompt.com> In-Reply-To: <4113C627.9030205@commandprompt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK, RCVD_IN_SORBS X-Spam-Level: ** X-Archive-Number: 200408/303 X-Sequence-Number: 63858 On 8/6/2004 1:55 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Hello, > > The two main replication products available are: > > Slony-I and Mammoth Replicator. > > Slony-I: Open Source, trigger based, batch replication. > > Mammoth Replicator: Closed Source (source license available), integrated > (no triggers), live and batch replication. Out of curiosity, what is the difference between live and batch replication? Slony-I has shown recently that it can achieve replication lags down to a second average, with sporadic spikes up to several seconds on packet loss in a WAN setup. That was replicating to a virtual machine running on a notebook and the DB connections ssh-tunneled over two wireless links and the internet ... not exactly what one would call a production grade network connection. The server was running a TPC-W ordering mix at that time, processing about 60,000 transactions per hour resulting in 15,000 row updates per hour (the PHP session data was DB-based and replicated too). A 10 hour fallback of the replica (the slave system was moved from Philadelphia to Toronto and back a weekend later :-) ) was cought up in 3 hours against the continuously running main server over the WAN, and in about 1.5 hours back in the WLan. > > They are both good solutions (I work for the creators of Mammoth > Replicator) that serve different purposes. Right (and I am the initial creator of Slony-I). Slony-I as a pure trigger based approach for example does not aim at fully automatic DDL replication. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #