On 2 April 2016 at 02:15, Moreno Andreo <moreno.and...@evolu-s.it> wrote:
> Actually we have to improve what our replicator is doing: it's only > replicating the single user's database. The improvement should that we can > put it on the "server" (in some cases there are groups of users sharing a > dedicated server) and, given a configuration of what and how to replicate, > it should replicate more than one DB a time. > That's a layer on top as far as pglogical is concerned. It's only interested in a single database at a time. The same is true of BDR. A tool that automatically configures newly found databases to be replicated should be pretty trivial to write, though. > We were beginning to "translate" (and then improve) this program in c#, > when I bumped into articles pointing to BDR, and I started taking a look. > But it seems that is good to replicahe whole servers, and still hasn't the > granularity we need. Huh? BDR is configured database-by-database. The only exception is with bdr_init_copy, for initial setup using binary base backups; in that case all databases are copied. It sounds like you actually *want* to replicate all databases at once. Presumably the reason you're not just using physical streaming replication for that is that different hosts have a different set of writeable databases? E.g. [Node A] [Node B] [DB-1] -> [DB-1] [DB-2] -> [DB-2] [DB-3] <- [DB-3] [DB-4] <- [DB-4] so each DB is written from only one node at a time, but both nodes have writeable DBs. Right? -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
