Hello,

Is it really necessary, when creating a new set and subscribing it that
a wait for event is done after the set creation? Won't the requests get
queued and so are guaranteed to be processed on the subscriber in the
right order. The reason I ask is because I have a single set currently
replicating to many slaves. I want to add a second set with a single
table to go from the same master to all slaves (with the intent of
eventually performing a merge set). If one of the slaves is temporarily
down (network outage or turned off), I want to be able to create the set
on the master and issue a subscribe set to all nodes, so that all the OK
nodes pick it up straightaway and when the bad node comes back it will
process create set, set add table, and subscribe set in the right order.
By putting a wait for event after the create set (and add tables) I
won't be able to subscribe any nodes until all including the bad one
confirm.

I just did a test on a single slave by stopping the network, issuing the
commands on the master, and then restarting the slaves network. The slon
daemon serving it did bomb out with errors, but when my watchdog
restarted it, it seem ok then, ad changes I had made to new and old
tables whilst the slave was down replicated through correctly. Did I
just get lucky or is this ok to do?

Thanks for you help,
Vicki


This message should be regarded as confidential. If you have received this 
email in error please notify the sender and destroy it immediately.
Statements of intent shall only become binding when confirmed in hard copy 
by an authorized signatory.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://gborg.postgresql.org/pipermail/slony1-general/attachments/20060223/70f7135f/attachment-0001.html