Hi,

I think it's a problem to have just one slon in wan architecture.
Sometimes one node is not up for long time so with one slon i can't stop slon master server side.
I don't know if i can stop just one node with a command for example, so maintenance in wan architecture is not easy


-----Message d'origine-----
De : Jan Wieck [mailto:jan at wi3ck.info] 
Envoyé : jeudi 15 janvier 2015 17:51
À : Sebastien Marchand; 'Stéphane Schildknecht'; 'Glyn Astill'; 'Vick Khera'
Cc : 'slony'
Objet : Re: [Slony1-general] too much work !

On 01/13/2015 09:45 AM, Sebastien Marchand wrote:
> Yeah, 17 cluster name if you prefer.
>
> I start one slon by one cluster.
> Samples :
>
> slon -s 200 -t 60000 -g 50 -o 60000 -c 0 -d 1 -f 
> /home/scripts/slon.conf repli_nat dbname=DB2 host=127.0.0.1 port=5432 
> user=slony password=123 slon -s 200 -t 60000 -g 50 -o 60000 -c 0 -d 1 
> -f /home/scripts/slon.conf repli_lc3 dbname=DB2 host=127.0.0.1 
> port=5432 user=slony password=123 slon -s 200 -t 60000 -g 50 -o 60000 
> -c 0 -d 1 -f /home/scripts/slon.conf repli_lc2 dbname=DB2 
> host=127.0.0.1 port=5432 user=slony password=123

This looks as if you created 17 Slony clusters instead of one cluster with 18 nodes.


Jan



>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Stéphane Schildknecht [mailto:stephane.schildknecht at postgres.fr]
> Envoyé : mardi 13 janvier 2015 15:22
> À : Sebastien Marchand; 'Glyn Astill'; 'Vick Khera'
> Cc : 'slony'
> Objet : Re: [Slony1-general] too much work !
>
> On 12/01/2015 11:38, Sebastien Marchand wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 18 nodes, wan network.
>> 2 replications ( one with 1 set and other with 2 sets ( 2 directions )
>> ) First replication from server 1 to n servers ( same schema, 37
>> tables )
>> 1 slon on server 1 and 1 slon by remote server Second replication :
>> set 1 : server A -> server 1 ( 90 replicated tables ) set 2 : server A
>> <- server 1 ( 1 replicated tables ) do the same with 17 other servers
>> ( one schema by server )
>> 17 slons on server 1 and 1 slon by  remote server database 5 gB.
>>
>> I don't know if that will help...
>
> Seems to me some information is missing. Distinction on databases, for instance.
>
> I guess, the 2 replications are not correlated.They just share same servers.
>
> In fact, the second replication is not 1 replication, it is 17 different replications. But, do they all end in the same database on server A ?
>
> --
> Stéphane Schildknecht
> Contact régional PostgreSQL pour l'Europe francophone Loxodata - Conseil, expertise et formations
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Slony1-general mailing list
> Slony1-general at lists.slony.info
> http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
>


-- 
Jan Wieck
Senior Software Engineer
http://slony.info