On 12/13/06, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at crankycanuck.ca> wrote:
>
> When we proved this happens, because someone in our office thought
> that it ought to be safe, we discovered it by luck: the colliding
> data that was overwritten in the place where the added column was
> supposed to go happened to be of the wrong datatype.  So the
> replication broke.  This happened because we were high enough volume
> that we ended up using data that was already in memory, but it didn't
> happen right after we made the change.


sorry but making the column with wrong type is by no way safer with execute
- it's just a problem with called sql. i said that i add the same column to
both nodes - same type.  same name. same table.


> Honestly, I don't care if you don't believe me that this is
> dangerous.  But you can expect me to say "Told you so" if it does
> break for you, and you will get exactly no sympathy from me then.
>

dont worry - i am already after several breaks (basically by doing the "add
column" in wrong way - master and then slave :). then i learned about
execute. and then i learned about doing them in other way (slave, then
master) - which seems to be working now.

best regards,

hubert


p.s. you seem to be particularu upset about my question - why? i am really
not implying that "execute" is bad. i am just asking to know my limitations
(and reasons of them).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://gborg.postgresql.org/pipermail/slony1-general/attachments/20061213/b14122e0/attachment.html