glynast...@yahoo.co.uk
Yeah I'm with Daniel on this one, Tatsuo?
--- On Tue, 9/3/10, daniel.cre...@l-3com.com daniel.cre...@l-3com.com
wrote:
From: daniel.cre...@l-3com.com daniel.cre...@l-3com.com
Subject: Re: [Pgpool-general] Multi-statement queries
To: Matthias Tief matth
Ah, I see.
--- On Wed, 10/3/10, Cesar Martin cmart...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Cesar Martin cmart...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Pgpool-general] Multi-statement queries
To: Glyn Astill glynast...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: Matthias Tief matth...@itso-berlin.de, pgpool-general@pgfoundry.org,
daniel.cre...@l
; Crespo, Daniel @ SDS;
pgpool-general@pgfoundry.org
Subject: Re: [Pgpool-general] Multi-statement queries
Hi,
As I understand one can avoid this problem by setting replicate_select
=
true, right? But than one will have almost no load balancing anymore.
Matthias
Tatsuo Ishii schrieb
Thank you for your rapid answer.
But for me it is still not clear. What you describe seems to be a
collection of statements transmitted as a single transaction. But this
is done very well by pgpool-II in my tests. I am wrong with that?
So than my question is: What is the difference between
] Multi-statement queries
Thank you for your rapid answer.
But for me it is still not clear. What you describe seems to be a
collection of statements transmitted as a single transaction. But this
is done very well by pgpool-II in my tests. I am wrong with that?
So than my question is: What
Le 05/03/2010 09:45, Matthias Tief a écrit :
Hallo,
we are planning to use pgpool-II as replication solution for our
PostgeSQL application. Currently we evaluate, whether the restriction of
pgpool-II affect our application. In the documentation you say:
pgpool-II cannot process
