| From: | Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, carlosreimer(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)br |
| Subject: | Re: Postgresql replication |
| Date: | 2005-08-25 18:52:31 |
| Message-ID: | 430E136F.2010405@empires.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Or, for something far easier, try
> http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgcluster/ which provides syncronous
> multi-master clustering.
>
He specifically said that pgcluster did not work for him because the
databases would be at physically seperate locations. PGCluster requires
that there be a load balancer and a replicator centrally located
managing the cluster. If a network problem happens at the centralized
location, it would bring down all locations completely.
I think he's looking for an async solution because of that. In my
solution, if one location goes down, the others keep going.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | William Yu | 2005-08-25 19:02:05 | Re: Postgresql replication |
| Previous Message | Vivek Khera | 2005-08-25 18:52:20 | Re: ctid access is slow |