Slony geeignet?

[Christian Voelker <C(dot)Voelker(at)gmx(dot)net>]

Hallo,

ich habe gerade diesen relativ aktuellen Vergleich
(Februar 2007) zu verschiedenen Möglichkeiten des
Postgres Clusterings gelesen und frage mich, ob
die miserable Bewertung von Slony zutreffend ist.
Eine richtige Version History konnte ich auf der
Slony Seite nicht finden.

<http://wiki.dspace.org/index.php/HOWTO_Clustering#PostgreSQL>
<http://slony.info/>

Gruß, Christian

Zitat:

PostgreSQL

Slony-I

Slony-I is a "master to multiple slaves" replication system.
Unfortunately, it lacks support for many key features I would
consider necessary for clustering:

    * No automatic failover or node promotion
    * Trigger-based update propogation means that (eg)
      schema changes cannot be automatically propogated
      across nodes, and it is unable to replicate large
      objects
    * It is unable to detect node failure
    * No support for a multi-master replication topology
      (ie: there will always be a single point of failure)
    * No support for connection brokering

All of these things combined mean that I will not be looking
into using Slony-I. If anyone has any positive experiences
with using it, please update this section.

Sequoia

Sequoia (formerly C-JDBC) is a drop-in replacement for JDBC.
No code changes are required for DSpace to use Sequoia
in place of the current Postgres or Oracle JDBC drivers.
It is released under an Apache license.

Sequoia claims to support lots of really useful features,
such as RAIDb (think RAID for databases).
(...)