| From: | Arnaud Lesauvage <thewild(at)freesurf(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL and Windows 2003 DFS Replication |
| Date: | 2006-07-28 09:37:00 |
| Message-ID: | 44C9DABC.2040202@freesurf.fr |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> I am currently deploying two servers (Windows 2003 R2) that will
>> be used as file servers as well as PostgreSQL servers.
>>
>> One of the server will be the main server, the other one a backup
>> server (no load-balancing, only an easy-recoverage solution).
>> The goal is to be able to start working quickly after one of the
>> server fails (after the main server fails actually, since the
>> backup server is not used).
>>
>> I already configured a high-availability solution for the file
>> server part by using the built-in DFS Replication service.
>
> I am very suspicious about DFS for this. File based replication
> usually doesn't work for sql servers because of the complex
> interdependencies in the files. It sounds like a fancy rsync and is
> very unlikely to be able to guarantee consistent backup unless all
> writes are synchronous.
OK, I get your point.
> for a cold/warm standby postgresql backup, I'd suggest using pitr.
> It's easy to set up and administer. for hot read only backup, bite the
> bullet and use slony.
Warm backup is just fine for us. I'll check the pitr option !
Thanks for your advice !
Regards
--
Arnaud
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Arnaud Lesauvage | 2006-07-28 09:39:45 | Re: PostgreSQL and Windows 2003 DFS Replication |
| Previous Message | Shoaib Mir | 2006-07-28 07:39:32 | Re: automatic and randomally population |