Hi, Robert Hodges wrote:
Could you expand on why logical application of WAL records is impractical in these cases? This is what Oracle does. Moreover once you are into SQL a lot of other use cases immediately become practical, such as large scale master/slave set-ups for read scaling.
I cannot speak for Tom, but what strikes me as a strange approach here is using the WAL for "logical application" of changes. That's because the WAL is quite far away from SQL, and thus from a "logical representation" of the data. It's rather pretty physical, meaning it's bound to a certain Postgres release and CPU architecture.
A more "logical" exchange format certainly poses less problems across releases, encodings and CPU architectures. Or even across RDMSen. But hey, let's see what Simon comes up with...
Regards Markus Wanner -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
