Stephen Denne wrote:
Hannu Krosing wrote:
The simplest form of synchronous wal shipping would not even need
postgresql running on slave, just a small daemon which
reports when wal
blocks are a) received and b) synced to disk.
While that does sound simple, I'd presume that most people would want the
guarantee of the same version of postgresql installed wherever the logs are
ending up, with the log receiver speaking the same protocol version as the log
sender. I imagine that would be most easily achieved through using something
like the continuously restoring startup mode of current postgresql.
Hmm, WAL version compatibility is an interesting question. Most minor
releases hasn't changed the WAL format, and it would be nice to allow
running different minor versions in the master and slave in those cases.
But it's certainly not unheard of to change the WAL format. Perhaps we
should introduce a WAL version number, similar to catalog version?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
