| From: | Bohdan Linda <bohdan(dot)linda(at)seznam(dot)cz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chander Ganesan <chander(at)otg-nc(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Madison Kelly <linux(at)alteeve(dot)com>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: High-availability |
| Date: | 2007-06-04 14:51:38 |
| Message-ID: | 20070604145138.GA10704@bafster.chello.upc.cz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 04:21:32PM +0200, Chander Ganesan wrote:
> I think you'll typically find that you can get one or the other -
> synchronous replication, or load balancing...but not both. On the other
Hi,
I am in very similar position, but I am more failover oriented. I am
considering using pgcluster, which shall resolve both at the cost of
slight transaction overhead. Does anyone have any experience with this?
What problems may I expect in this setup?
Kind regards,
Bohdan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Staubo | 2007-06-04 15:03:17 | Re: NULLS and User Input WAS Re: multimaster |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2007-06-04 14:47:17 | Re: [Fwd: Re: Autovacuum keeps vacuuming a table disabled in pg_autovacuum] |