From: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: High Availability with Postgres |
Date: | 2010-06-22 19:05:10 |
Message-ID: | 4C210966.7010601@hogranch.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 06/22/10 1:58 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> John R Pierce<pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> writes:
>
>> failure modes can
>> include things like failing fans (which will be detected, resulting in a
>> server shutdown if too many fail), power supply failure (redundant PSUs, but
>> I've seen the power combining circuitry fail). Any of these sorts of
>> failures will result in a failover without corrupting the data.
>>
>> and of course, intentional planned failovers to do OS maintenance... you
>> patch the standby system, fail over to it and verify its good, then patch
>> the other system.
>>
> Ah, I see the use case much better now, thank you. And I begin too see
> how expensive reaching such a goal is, too. Going from "I can lose this
> many transactions" to "No data lost, ever" is at that price, though.
>
yeah. generally when money is involved in the transactions, you gotta
stick to the 'no committed data lost ever'. there's plenty of other use
cases for that too.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Phil Jackson | 2010-06-22 20:19:33 | Trying to install ODBC driver on Windows XP notebook |
Previous Message | Bill Moran | 2010-06-22 18:21:23 | Re: what happens to postmaster? |