Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote: > On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 09:13:14 -0700 > paul rivers <rivers.paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > For a database of InnoDB tables, people tend to replicate the > > database, and then backup the slave (unless the db is trivially > > That recalled me the *unsupported* feeling I have that it is easier > to setup a HA replication solution on MySQL. Well, if you have a crappy system that cannot sustain concurrent load or even be backed up concurrently with regular operation, one solution is to write a kick-ass replication system. The other solution is to enhance the ability of the system to deal with concurrent operation. We keep hearing how great all those Web 2.0 sites are; Slashdot, Flickr, etc; and they all run on farms and farms of MySQL servers, "because MySQL replication is so good". I wonder if replication is an actual _need_ or it's there just because the other aspects of the system are so crappy. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
