From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pierre LEBRECH <pierre(dot)lebrech(at)laposte(dot)net> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slony1 or DRBD for replication ? |
Date: | 2006-04-21 01:42:43 |
Message-ID: | 20060421014243.GR49405@pervasive.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 07:42:29PM +0200, Pierre LEBRECH wrote:
> The second location should be used in case of emergency. So, if my first
> machine/system becomes unreachable for whatever reason, I want to be
> able to switch very quickly to the other machine. Of course, the goal is
> to have no loss of data. That is the context.
>
> Furthermore, I have experience with DRBD (not on databases) and I do not
> know if DRBD would be the best way to solve this replication problem.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions and explanations.
>
> PS : my database is actualy in production in a critical environment
I believe that Continuent currently has the only no-loss (ie:
syncronous) replication solution. DRBD might allow for this as well, if
it can be setup to not return from fsync until the data's been
replicated.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-04-21 02:35:40 | Re: slow cursor |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-04-21 01:31:22 | Re: what the problem with this query |