From: | Pierre LEBRECH <pierre(dot)lebrech(at)laposte(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slony1 or DRBD for replication ? |
Date: | 2006-04-14 17:42:29 |
Message-ID: | 443FDF05.4060600@laposte.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 14:56 +0200, Pierre LEBRECH wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>I want to replicate my PostgreSQL database at an other location. The
>>distance between the two locations should be around 10 miles. The link
>>should be a fast ethernet dedicated link.
>>
>>What would you suggest me to do? DRBD or slony1 for PostgreSQL replication?
>
>
> It depends on your needs.
>
> If you want to be able to use the slave postgresql instance (reporting,
> non replicated name spaces, materialized views etc...) Slony or Mammoth
> Replicator.
>
> If you want to also replicate users/groups, grant and revoke, Mammoth
> Replicator.
>
> If you just want a hot backup... DRBD.
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
The second location should be used in case of emergency. So, if my first
machine/system becomes unreachable for whatever reason, I want to be
able to switch very quickly to the other machine. Of course, the goal is
to have no loss of data. That is the context.
Furthermore, I have experience with DRBD (not on databases) and I do not
know if DRBD would be the best way to solve this replication problem.
Thanks for any suggestions and explanations.
PS : my database is actualy in production in a critical environment
>
>
>>Thank you.
>>
>>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>>TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
>> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
>> match
>>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Browne | 2006-04-14 18:14:56 | Re: Slony1 or DRBD for replication ? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-14 15:48:22 | Re: what the problem with this query |