From: | David Kerr <dmk(at)mr-paradox(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Mikko Partio <mpartio(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgres Clustering Options |
Date: | 2009-11-12 23:47:44 |
Message-ID: | 20091112234744.GM99174@mr-paradox.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 07:50:06AM +0200, Mikko Partio wrote:
- On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:28 PM, David Kerr <dmk(at)mr-paradox(dot)net> wrote:
- > basically point to using a replication based solution, which i don't think
- > would meet my
- > performance demands.
- >
- > Does anyone have expereince with this or a similar setup that they could
- > share with me?
- >
-
-
- We have done a setup like this with Red Hat Cluster Suite.
-
- We are quite happy with the setup in general, and it has been working well
- even in 'unexpected circumstances' (power outages etc). The only thing I'd
- change in this setup if I could is the cluster software: RHCS is not mature
- enough and it seems every release contains new critical bugs, and sometimes
- even mission-critical components such as quorum disk do not work after an
- upgrade.
-
- Regards
-
- Mikko
Hi Mikko,
In your enviornment, are the applications able to recover automatically after
a DB failover?
For exmaple, we're using Java/JDBC connections +Geronimo we're researching whether
or not JDBC/Geronimo would be able to retry in the case of losing a connection to
the DB vs failing and crashing the app.
Dave
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Juan Backson | 2009-11-13 03:26:54 | pgmemcache vs pgmemcached |
Previous Message | Peter Hunsberger | 2009-11-12 22:51:15 | Re: [pgeu-general] pgday.eu |