Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dijit 1967 days ago
wow, are you kidding? MySQL replication is possibly the worst I've ever seen.

There is almost no consideration for the target being up to date, I have personally experienced missed inserts, replication lags, and the replica being set to read/write.

PGs integrated replication is far superior, it even has support for bootstrapping a new replica node without rsync and a command to `promote` the replica to write master.
2 comments
evanelias 1967 days ago
Replication issues in modern MySQL are caused by user error, not inherent bugs. For example if you're configuring replication manually, you must ensure that replicas are set to read_only. Clustering options introduced over the past few years do this automatically though.

> PGs integrated replication is far superior, it even has support for bootstrapping a new replica node without rsync and a command to `promote` the replica to write master

MySQL has this functionality too, e.g. https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/clone-plugin.html and https://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql-shell/8.0/en/working-with-re...

To be clear, I am not claiming MySQL is superior to PG. However, I have found that many PG users are unfamiliar with the huge improvements introduced in MySQL over the past ~8 years.

link
claytonjy 1967 days ago
What about Percona? I haven't used it, but a common sentiment on HN has been that Postgres doesn't have something quite on par with it.

Citus and, more recently, Patroni, seem to be the dominant Postgres analogues; have they caught up? Where do they dominate?

link