| ▲ | znpy 3 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
It's weird that PostgreSQL still doesn't have a proper, open source, general multi-master implementation. At this point i wonder if i'll ever see that. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | jjice 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Do other RDBMSs have this? I genuinely have no clue. I've been fortunate enough to be able to get away with one primary and multiple secondaries at my largest usage of Postgres. Multi-master is the kind of thing I am fully out of my depth on, so I'm curious if there's a well defined path for implementation here or what. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | timacles 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
It has been tried many times. Good luck to pgdog, but there’s a reason these projects don’t stick. Multi master, from even a conceptual perspective, is incredibly complicated. Databases, transactions, consistency, parallelism are all very complicated. It’s something that always seems promising at the start but as soon as maintenance and long term improvements enter the picture(ie integrating new Postgres versions), the complexity becomes too much. | |||||||||||||||||||||||