Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32C981337B54 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:56:01 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 05794-03 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 22:55:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail.catalyst.net.nz (bertrand.catalyst.net.nz [202.78.240.40]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A171E1337B50 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:55:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.catalyst.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CE6931C86 for ; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:55:49 +1300 (NZDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at catalyst.net.nz Received: from mail.catalyst.net.nz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bertrand.catalyst.net.nz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vmxA+YpQoRgI for ; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:55:48 +1300 (NZDT) Received: from [IPv6:2404:130:0:1000:222:15ff:fe5c:2471] (unknown [IPv6:2404:130:0:1000:222:15ff:fe5c:2471]) (Authenticated sender: mark.kirkwood) by mail.catalyst.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C8E132133 for ; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:55:48 +1300 (NZDT) Message-ID: <4CC0C4F3.30501@catalyst.net.nz> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:55:47 +1300 From: Mark Kirkwood User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.14) Gecko/20101006 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Simplifying replication References: <4CBCE356.2080703@agliodbs.com> In-Reply-To: <4CBCE356.2080703@agliodbs.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.409 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, FS_REPLICA=3.599, SARE_SPEC_REPLICA=0.72, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Archive-Number: 201010/1593 X-Sequence-Number: 172633 On 19/10/10 13:16, Josh Berkus wrote: > Robert asked me to write this up, so here it is. > > It is critical that we make replication easier to set up, administrate > and monitor than it currently is. In my conversations with people, > this is more important to our users and the adoption of PostgreSQL > than synchronous replication is. > > First, I'm finding myself constantly needing to tutor people on how to > set up replication. The mere fact that it requires a minimum 1-hour > class to explain how to use it, or a 10-page tutoral, tells us it's > too complex. As further evidence, Bruce and I explained binary > replication to several MySQL geeks at OpenSQLCamp last weekend, and > they were horrified at the number and complexity of the steps > required. As it currently is, binary replication is not going to win > us a lot of new users from the web development or virtualization world. > +1 I've been having the same experience - how to set this up and do failover and failback etc occupies quite a bit of time in courses I've been teaching here in NZ and Australia. Having this whole replication business much simpler is definitely the way to go. A good example of how simple it can be is mongodb, where it is essentially one command to setup a 2 replica system with a voting arbiter: $ mongo > rs.initiate( { _id : "replication_set0", members : [ { _id : 0, host : "192.163,2,100" }, { _id : 1, host : "192.168.2.101" }, { _id : 2, host : "192.168.2.103", arbiterOnly : true } ] } )