From: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: high availability |
Date: | 2003-04-16 11:23:36 |
Message-ID: | 20030416112336.GB18951@libertyrms.info |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 06:43:48PM -0400, Richard Welty wrote:
> i'm pondering a startup right now which will have some rather stringent
> requirements for high availability, and one of the issues that's on my mind
> is how to upgrade a high availability postgresql server farm. does anyone
> have any thoughts/experience on this?
Define "high availability".
The first thing you need is an OS and hardware that can support hot
plugging of all the hardware, &c. Plus you need ultra-reliable
hardware in the first place.
Then, use one of the replication systems on offer to make sure
you have a second (and probably third) database.
If you want automated failover, PostgreSQL, Inc. say they'll sell you
something which can do it. I am suspicious of the assumptions behind
the approach, but I haven;t investigated it deeply.
If what you want is 100% guaranteed uptime with no interruptions for
maintenance, I don't really think Postgres can do it yet.
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tony Grant | 2003-04-16 11:40:56 | will an honest French ISP please stand up |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2003-04-16 09:35:57 | Re: Disk usage |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Patrick Welche | 2003-04-16 11:44:52 | Re: [INTERFACES] First draft of new FE/BE protocol spec posted for comments |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2003-04-16 09:16:54 | Re: Are we losing momentum? |