On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 05:53:55PM +0800, Han He wrote:
> I encounter a problem when using slony. I had a transaction that updated
> both table A and table B. This is atomic transaction. While slony is doing
> the replication, on parent, the transaction is done, on slave node, there
> might exists error which cause the transaction error. That’s to say, on
> slave node, table A is updated while table B is not updated. This will cause
> problem to our application. Is there any way in slony to keep the
> transaction atomic?

Apart from an actual hardware failure or something like that on the
replica, how would it be possible that the transaction would fail on
the replica but succeed on the origin?  If all the tables are
replicated from the origin to the replica, then the transaction ought
to succeed on the replica exactly as it does on the origin.  No?

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at crankycanuck.ca