> That's likely a holdover from when mysql had a better replication story than postgresql.
What is the Galera-equivalent in the Postgres world? There's BDR, but the latest versions are closed source.
We use Galera in a bunch of places because it's fairly straight forward to get an HA cluster going, and with keepalived, we can point a front-end to a vIP that fails over automatically if one system goes sideways.
afaik, MySQL never had a better replication story than PostgreSQL, you've always had to use Percona's add-ons to get something workable. Even then (many years ago), we had multiple data loss incidents that were precipitated by widespread internal confusion over the bizarre intricacies of `binlog_format`.
Like most software that gains adoption, MySQL made some very broad claims about their software's capabilities and never really delivered on them, at least not in a way that would be considered production-ready by Serious Persons(TM).
That's the crux of MySQL v. PgSQL, Linux v. BSD, etc. Good engineers spend their time building good software and are generally too focused on that to spend much time going around and making outlandish promises. Postgres has benefited from Oracle's intentionally-bad stewardship over MySQL, but it doesn't usually work that way.
What is the Galera-equivalent in the Postgres world? There's BDR, but the latest versions are closed source.
We use Galera in a bunch of places because it's fairly straight forward to get an HA cluster going, and with keepalived, we can point a front-end to a vIP that fails over automatically if one system goes sideways.