Each distant database works on its own domain of data. Then no conflict should happen during updates. One thing I have not specified is that the distant databases don't handle global data but only data collected at the local level. Slony-1 seems not to provide replication from multi-partial databases to one global database. But maybe I'm wrong... Can you tell me more about this use of Slony? Hugues -----Message d'origine----- De : Scott Marlowe [mailto:smarlowe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Envoyé : vendredi 5 mai 2006 19:10 À : Houssais Hugues Cc : pgsql general Objet : Re: [GENERAL] Unify distant Postgres databases On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 04:21, Houssais Hugues wrote: > Hi, > > We desire to implement a multi-site server that unifies data from > distant Postgres databases in a nightly batch. The distant databases > have all the same architecture (schema). The size of data exchanged > between distant servers and the multi-site manager has to be reduced > to the strictly usefully data. > > We naturally have been interested by the WAL archiving (PITR). But > after a deep analysis of this skill, we still encounter problems. The > main problem is unifying the data from many databases in a common > database. > > Has anyone experienced a solution to this problem... maybe not with > WAL? Are you talking a big multi-way setup? That's rather complex, and resolution of conflicting updates can keep a DBA busy full time in a poorly thought out setup. OTOH, if you're looking at having one or more one-way pushes in your setup, you might want to look at using slony. There are a lot of ways you can set it up, depending on your needs. Got a bit more detail on what you're wanting to do?
