Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I still see having 2 different settings: > > Synchronous: XID visibility is pushed to the master. Maintains synchronous > failover, and users are expected to run *1* master to *1* slave for most > installations. > > Asynchronous: replication stops on the slave whenever minxid gets out of > synch. Could have multiple slaves, but noticeable lag between master and > slave.
I agree with you that we have sync/async option in log-shipping. Also, we could have another setting - synchronous-shipping and asynchronous-flushing. We won't lose transactions if both servers are down at once and can avoid delays to flush wal files into primary's disks. As for multiple slaves, we could have a cascading configuration; WAL receiver also delivers WAL records to other servers. I think it is simple that the postgres core has only one-to-one replication and multiple slaves are supported by 3rd party's WAL receivers. Regards, --- ITAGAKI Takahiro NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
