From: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Auotmated postgres failover |
Date: | 2016-01-21 22:16:10 |
Message-ID: | 20160121221610.GP7446@crankycanuck.ca |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:34:18AM -0800, John R Pierce wrote:
> the most difficult part is reliably determining that A) the master has
> crashed, and B) fencing the failed old master so it doesn't wake up and
> think its still in charge.
>
And, depending on your workload, C) that you actually want to fail over.
I've seen an awful lot of people want automatic failover who also
can't afford for the already-committed transactions on the master to
be lost. Unless you're running synchronous, be sure you have the
workload that can actually accept lost writes.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Yury Zhuravlev | 2016-01-21 22:16:28 | Re: Building PostgreSQL 9.6devel sources with Microsoft Visual C++ 2015? |
Previous Message | Johannes | 2016-01-21 21:59:18 | Re: long transfer time for binary data |