On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Sim Zacks <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I have heard good things about Bucardo, though I haven't tried it myself > yet. I was warned that it would be risky to have 2 masters that have the > same tables modified in both because of issues such as delayed sync, race > conditions and other such goodies that may corrupt the meaning of the data. Just to be clear and fair to Bucardo, I would add a few points. All multi-master replication solutions that use an optimistic mechanism require "conflict resolution" cases and code. This is the same with SQLServer and Oracle etc.. Referring to a well known problem as a race condition seems to introduce doubt and fear into a situation that is well understood. Bucardo does offer hooks for conflict resolution to allow you to program around the issues. So if I felt that multi-master replication was the right way to go for a solution, Bucardo is a good choice. Just to add other info: if multi-master replication uses pessimistic coherence, then the coherence mechanism can also be a source of contention and/or cause the need for alternative kinds of conflict resolution. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
