Hi Marco,

You have 4 databases on each server. Is this absolutely necessary?
Unless you have issues you're specifically solving for with this
configuration, perhaps you would be better off using a single database
with perhaps schema to differentiate between what used to be in
separate databases. This would allow you to reduce the number of slons
you're running since you could manage all four data sets via a single
instance of slony.

Drew


On 9/27/06, Marco Aurelio V. da Silva <marcoprodata at yahoo.com.br> wrote:
> Dear?s,
>
> I have this scenary:
>
> Server A: Bd1     Server B: Bd2     Server C: Bd3          Server D: Bd4
>
> Server A
> Bd1 = Master
> Bd2 = Slave
> Bd3 = Slave
> Bd4 = Slave
>
> Sever B
> Bd1 = Slave
> Bd2 = Master
> Bd3 = Slave
> Bd4 = Slave
>
> Server C
> Bd1 = Slave
> Bd2 = Slave
> Bd3 = Master
> Bd4 = Slave
>
> Server D
> Bd1 = Slave
> Bd2 = Slave
> Bd3 = Slave
> Bd4 = Master
>
> for not having an Internet of high availability in each server, it exists
> the necessity of if working in such a way, having one bd to master in each
> server and 3 bd?s slave. Slony is ideal for this scene?
>
> other doubt,
> in each server, I execute a process slon to send the data and other to
> receive, after to execute the process to receive if the server responsavel
> for sending the data will not have executed the process to send it gives an
> error message and leaves, which the indicated form to solve this problem?
> slon_watchdog?
>
> Thanks to Advance,
>
> Marco Aur?lio V. da Silva
> Prodata Inf. e Cad. Ltda.
> marco at prodatanet.com.br
> MSN: marco at prodatanet.com.br
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> O Yahoo! est? de cara nova. Venha conferir!
> http://br.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Slony1-general mailing list
> Slony1-general at gborg.postgresql.org
> http://gborg.postgresql.org/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
>