On 08/11/2009 02:52 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Mark Mielke<m...@mark.mielke.cc> wrote:
I remember this debate from 6 months ago. :-)
I prefer not to try and fit square pegs into round holes. Streaming
replication sounds like the best description. It may not be the keywords
that newbies are looking for, but too bad for them. Calling it something
different than what it is, just so that people who don't understand why it
is wrong will have something that approximates the right understanding, is
not a just cause. :-)
Uhm, I think you are confused.
Hot Standby = Allow read-only queries on a PostgreSQL server during
archive recovery
Synchronous (or Streaming) Replication = Allow WAL to be streamed on a
byte level rather than copied file-by-file
Hot Standby is not any sort of replication.
I don't think I was confused before - but I am confused now. :-)
This patch does not provide streaming replication?
Having the standby allow for read-only queries is a "would be nice" for
me, but it's not very useful. I've been monitoring these threads (and
wishing they were at a level I could participate and contribute on),
because I want the ability to have near real time updates such that the
standby can become live. "Hot standby" to me means "the slave is as
close to up-to-date as possible and can potentially take over at any
time in a near instance." This *implies* some sort of streaming
replication (byte level rather than file-by-file) rather than waiting
for WAL logs to become full and shipped.
If this patch doesn't give me near real time replication, then I am
confused about why I would want it at all. pg_standby already gives the
ability to do replication on a per completed WAL log file basis.
Cheers,
mark
--
Mark Mielke<m...@mielke.cc>
