On Feb 9, 2009, at 9:43 AM, Mister Donut wrote:

>> Actually that's not true. We aren't using a system like SimpleDB
>> where your changes might not be immediately available in subsequent
>> queries by the same user.
>
> Isn't the point of replication to handle massive reads?

No, it's primarily for offline access and distributed edits. But it  
can be used for spreading read (and update) load too.

> If so, you'd
> be using load balancing? So you cannot predict which server will be
> chosen?

Seriously? Only if you were using a randomized load balancer, but why  
are you making that assumption?

-Damien