3 ms·
Not really. PostgreSQL has excellent synchronous replication which can be controlled per transaction. This is missing in MySQL. What PostgreSQL is missing is lo
by jeltz 12y ago
Not really. PostgreSQL has excellent synchronous replication which can be controlled per transaction. This is missing in MySQL. What PostgreSQL is missing is logical replication (both master-slave and master-master. So depending on your use case either could be ahead of the other.
I am almost 100% certain PostgreSQL will have have stable master-master replication within 1.5 years. The team working on it has come really far along.
- vidarh 12y agoLacking master-master is a huge thing. And I still curse at Postgres whenever I set up replication. There's no good reason why I should have to worry about wal-archiving, for example. I'll admit I've never, ever wanted synchronous replication, so that's not a feature I've cared about. I agree it will probably get there. But from my point of view it is still substantially lagging.
- jeltz 12y agoYou will not have to worry about WAL archiving anymore in 9.4 with the addition of replication slots.