From: | Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Matt Miller <mattm(at)epx(dot)com> |
Cc: | Carlos Henrique Reimer <carlosreimer(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)br>, Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgresql replication |
Date: | 2005-08-26 00:45:51 |
Message-ID: | 430E663F.1080107@empires.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Matt Miller wrote:
>>>http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgcluster/ which provides syncronous
>>>multi-master clustering.
>>
>>He specifically said that pgcluster did not work for him
>>because ...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 the load balancer is an optional component. Clients can connect
> either to a load balancer, or directly to a specific machine.
The replicator surely is not optional, and must be centralized.
> Also, I think pgcluster can operate async. If the system runs in
> "normal" mode then the client gets a response as soon as the transaction
> is committed on the local machine. In "reliable" mode the client waits
> for the commit to happen on all machines.
>
Interesting. I suppose whatever works for your application is the right
answer for replication. PGCluster is query-based, right? I suppose the
question would then be, would he rather use a trigger-based replication
solution, like Slony, or a query-based replication solution.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matt A. | 2005-08-26 00:55:30 | Altering built-in functions cast |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2005-08-25 23:28:12 | Its Beta Time Again ... 8.1 Beta 1 Now Available |