Because my slaves are of the companys differents, and one slave can?t have
access to another. The slaves only has access in the master.



2006/11/7, Scott Marlowe <smarlowe at g2switchworks.com>:
>
> I'm not sure why you can't do this.  I.e. you have it so that it works
> like this now:
>
> Provider -=< 4 Subscriber
>
> In my version you'd have:
>
> Provider -=< Subscriber / Provider -=< Subscribers 1-8
>
> Or something like that.  SLAVES 2-8 would still have all the same data,
> they would just get it from SLAVE1, and SLAVE1's primary job would be to
> be intermediate holder of the data.  If you needed more slaves, you
> might have to set up a kind of tree.
>
> All of slony would have this problem as would any replication system
> like it, because each subscriber expects to get its data straight from
> the provider, which in this case, you've got as the single machine at
> the front.
>
> Is there some technical reason why my methodology won't work, or is this
> a religious issue?
>
> On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 13:26, Andrew And wrote:
> >
> >
> >  In my situation I can?t do this. I need to use 1 master and 4 or 8
> > slaves.
> >
> >  I am using slony 1.2.0 version, this version has problem?
> >
> >
> > 2006/11/7, Scott Marlowe <smarlowe at g2switchworks.com>:
> >         On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 10:03, Andrew And wrote:
> >         >
> >         >
> >         >  I am with a lot of use of the CPU.
> >         >  My master has 70% CPU with 4 slaves. What could I do to my
> >         master not
> >         > use a lot of CPU?
> >
> >         Replicate to one single slave, then have the other slaves
> >         replicate off
> >         of that one.  I.e. make it a "middle man" to the other
> >         servers.
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://gborg.postgresql.org/pipermail/slony1-general/attachments/20061107/7357af96/attachment-0001.html