On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Jim Nasby <j...@nasby.net> wrote: > On 3/12/13 9:10 AM, Ants Aasma wrote: >> I have a feeling this is an increasingly widespread pattern with a >> proliferation of mobile devices that need syncing. > > If you're doing that with timestamps you're asking for a slew of problems, > not all of which can be solved by just adding some random amount of fluff to > your criteria. A queue-based solution is often a more robust solution, even > if it is harder to implement.
Do you know of anything else besides the obvious issues with having to use one clocksource and ensure that it produces monotonic timestamps? My first reaction was also that this is what queues are meant for, but the proposed solution seems to work surprisingly well. Unless you can point at some glaring hole that I'm missing I would say that it is good enough for a rather wide range of syncing problems. Ants Aasma -- Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH Gröhrmühlgasse 26 A-2700 Wiener Neustadt Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
