* Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [081211 10:03]: > Sending data twice is not a requirement I ever heard expressed, nor has > the lack of ability to send it twice been voiced as a criticism for any > form of replication I'm familiar with. Ask the DRBD guys if sending data > twice is necessary or required to make replication work. > > If multiple people think its a good idea then I respect your choice of > option. > > But I also think that many or perhaps most people will choose not to > send data twice and I respect that choice of option also.
Well, PostgreSQL has WAL, so we've already accepted the notion of "send data twice" being useful sometimes... But I would note that the "archive" and "streaming" are both sending the data *different* places... or at least, in my case would be... And, also, I know WAL archiving isn't necessary for replication to work. but it's necessary for me to sleep comfortably at night ;-) I'm just suprised that people are willing to throw away their backup/PITR archiving once they have a singl "live slave" up. a. -- Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god, [EMAIL PROTECTED] command like a king, http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
