No. Here it's the master pushing change to the slave, rather than the slave pulling it (as you'd normally expect), hence the inner fragility of the model. Moreover, replication is about having "exactly the same thing" in two places, while this could be an audit log he keeps in its historical completeness on a remote box, while pruning the local table on regular basis, so not exactly a replication.
Bèrto
--
==============================
If Pac-Man had affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in a darkened room munching pills and listening to repetitive music.
On 25 April 2013 16:17, Rob Richardson <RDRichardson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Isn't that basically what replication is supposed to do?
RobR, quite possibly revealing his ignorance about replication.
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
==============================
If Pac-Man had affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in a darkened room munching pills and listening to repetitive music.
