| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Chris Travers <chris(at)travelamericas(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Replication Ideas |
| Date: | 2003-08-26 06:01:26 |
| Message-ID: | 20030826025754.V691@ganymede.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> Chris Travers <chris(at)travelamericas(dot)com> writes:
> > Yes I have. Postgres-r is not a high-availability solution which is
> > capable of transparent failover,
>
> What makes you say that? My understanding is it's supposed to survive
> loss of individual servers.
How does it play 'catch up' went a server comes back online?
note that I did go through the 'docs' on how it works, and am/was quite
impressed at what they were doing ... but, if I have a large network, say,
and one group is connecting to ServerA, and another group with ServerB,
what happens when ServerA and ServerB loose network connectivity for any
period of time? How do they re-sync when the network comes back up again?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Lutz | 2003-08-26 06:23:32 | Re: convert database to unicode |
| Previous Message | Stephen Robert Norris | 2003-08-26 06:01:22 | Re: move to usenet? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-08-26 13:54:55 | Re: Buglist |
| Previous Message | Curt Sampson | 2003-08-26 05:19:47 | Re: [HACKERS] Decent VACUUM (was: Buglist) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ang Chin Han | 2003-08-26 06:49:17 | Re: Query too slow |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2003-08-25 22:28:09 | Re: Replication Ideas |