> On 2/23/2005 9:07 AM, hannu at skype.net wrote:
>> I wonder if one database be can part of two clusters, if the tables
>> belonging to these cliusters are kept separate ?
>
> Yes, in that case each of the origins runs one slon and the
> dual-subscriber runs 2 of them.

Thats what I thought, I was just afraid there may be some hidden
dependencies.

Thanks!

> The same effect can be achieved by keeping the tables just in separate
> set's, each with a different origin. The two origin databases need not
> be subscribed to each others sets, and the third "consolidation"
> database can be subscribed to both.
>
> It's not 100% the same. If one of the origin databases is down, the
> other will not clean out old replication log information any more, so
> the two cluster install has it's pro's.

It also helps against exponential growth of PATHS's and LISTEN's :)

And in my case I just have to get data from two existing rather large
clusters I dont want to resubscribe.

---------------
Hannu