Re: Keycloak and Postgres

From: Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com>
To: Marc Tempelmeier <marc(dot)tempelmeier(at)flane(dot)de>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Keycloak and Postgres
Date: 2017-04-01 10:57:20
Message-ID: 20170401065720.1b2ce005ce9e206a060ef81c@potentialtech.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 13:58:36 +0000
Marc Tempelmeier <marc(dot)tempelmeier(at)flane(dot)de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have a replication question, we have some big Cisco UCS VM thingy, where VMs are snapshotted, the drives are abstracted etc. If a VM crashes it will be resumed in 1 min from another rack. What brings us master slave replication or some other kind of replication in this setup? Should we do it because of other failures?

Because of how Postgres caches changes, you may find that a failover
requires some time in recovery mode. Those VM snapshot systems are great,
but they aren't quite perfect if they don't know what is being done with
the data on the drives.

Whether it's good enough depends heavily on what your expectation is.
Before trusting it to meet your needs, I would spend some time simulating
failures and seeing what actually happens.

--
Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom DalPozzo 2017-04-01 16:09:37 vacuum on table with all rows frozen
Previous Message kbrannen 2017-03-31 22:49:17 Re: Confusing order by error