| From: | Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_system_identifier() |
| Date: | 2013-08-25 22:47:33 |
| Message-ID: | 521A8985.2040509@nasby.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8/23/13 11:23 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
> This doesn't generate a unique id. You could back up a standby and restore it and point it at the original master and end up with two standbies with the same id.
If you want to enforce something unique throughout a cluster, I think we're stuck with having the cluster communicate IDs across an entire cluster. AFAIK that's how both Slony and londiste 3 do it.
I think it's also noteworthy that Slony and londiste both rely on the user specifying node identifiers. They don't try to be magic about it. I think there's 2 advantages there:
- Code is simpler
- Users can choose a naming schema that makes sense for them
--
Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect jim(at)nasby(dot)net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-08-26 01:36:54 | Re: Hstore: Query speedups with Gin index |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-08-25 18:27:08 | Re: Performance problem in PLPgSQL |