On 12/12/06, Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 06:48:16PM +0100, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote: > question is - what is the worst case scenario? what should happen for me to > get punished for this? - Inserts to the master break
nope. it does when i do master first and then slave. - Replication attempts break (on a set containing the data that's
causing the problem) -- which blocks all subsequent replication too, note.
why? never happened to me.
> as for now - even with bad (kvvvv instead of kvvvvv) triggers i still get > good results (kudos to dev team). No, you're _not_ getting good results. You're getting lucky. The problem crops up in a way that makes it hard to predict when it will happen (it's not indeterminate, it's just got a lot of variables).
being consistenly lucky on 40+g database with over 600 transactions per second - possible, but i doubt i have such luck. and i have did it over 50 times already.
If you need to do DDL on a resplicated table, you REALLY REALLY do need to allow the blocking. Sorry. (And are you really telling me, anyway, that you can't block for even 5 minutes one time in a planned way? Slony does not provide "five 9s", you know.)
i know it doesn't. this is not a problem for me. i was just asking for worst case scenario and technical reasons for them. depesz -- http://www.depesz.com/ - nowy, lepszy depesz
_______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list [email protected] http://gborg.postgresql.org/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
