[Bucardo-general] Is Bucardo appropriate for this situation....

[Rosser Schwarz]

On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 5:00 AM, Martin Bramwell
<martinhbramwell at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I found Bucardo earlier today by googling "Postgres bidirectional
> replication", and I'd like to ask if it is suited to a situation I have in
> mind.

Yes, Bucardo is fairly ideally suited for your use-case.  It was
originally developed to be used in an environment where the connection
between the DB servers was intermittent.

> In general terms my questions might be:
> 1) Is there a maximum downtime between master servers beyond which Bucardo
> will croak?

There's not specifically an amount of downtime beyond which Bucardo
won't work, so much as the obvious fact that, the longer connectivity
has been broken, the more effort it will take to catch both sides back
up.  (And the higher the likelihood of the same row having been
updated on both sides without being synchronized, leading to potential
conflicts.)

> 2) Does Bucardo handle "sputtering" replication gracefully?

Relatively, yes.  It can sometimes get a bit stroppy with the volume
of log messages it leaves in the event of an outage, but once
connectivity has been restored, it should be able to pick right back
up.  The logging volume is adjustable, however, so that can be
mitigated some.  And again, as above: if your dbs lose connectivity
for too long, your chances of seeing the same row on both sides of the
sync being updated, without being reconciled increase significantly.

rls

-- 
:wq