So, we are trying to track down some problems we're having with an
implementation of slony on our database. I've posted to the slony list
about this issue, but I wanted to get a more generic response from the
perspective of postgresql.
Is it a 'bad thing' to have a unique key on a field that is often times
null? This application has been running along just fine for a couple of
years now, but when we try to implement a slony replication solution,
this one table consistently has inconsistent data between the primary
node and the slave.
The problem we are having with slony seems to be related to a table that
has just such a key, so we are trying to figure out if this is causing
the problem.
--
Until later, Geoffrey
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
