From: | Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Laura Smith <n5d9xq3ti233xiyif2vp(at)protonmail(dot)ch> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Postgresql HA cluster |
Date: | 2023-10-16 13:20:56 |
Message-ID: | 20231016152056.57c74d08@karst |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 19:21:46 +0000
Laura Smith <n5d9xq3ti233xiyif2vp(at)protonmail(dot)ch> wrote:
> ------- Original Message -------
> On Friday, October 13th, 2023 at 14:10, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > But really, double check first why a simple primary-standby architecture
> > doesn't meet your needs. The simpler the architecture is, the better. Even
> > from the application point of view.
> >
>
>
> From my perspective I do wonder why Postgres doesn't have an equivalent to
> MySQL Group Replication.
>
> Although you can run MySQL GR as multi-primary, most people run it as
> primary-standby.
>
> However the difference with Postgres is that MySQL Group does leader
> election. Whilst Postgres failover/failback is a highly manual affair.
PostgreSQL core only cares about primary-standby replication.
Auto-failover must involved various components way outside of the scope of
PostgreSQL itself: the system, the network, sometime the storage, a quorum
mechanism, sometime some fencing, etc.
There's various auto-failover, non manual, solutions in PostgreSQL ecosystems,
they just all live outside of the core.
Regards,
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-10-16 14:06:05 | Re: Purely declarative FKs |
Previous Message | Christophe Pettus | 2023-10-16 08:43:30 | Re: Purely declarative FKs |