From: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Problem with Streaming Replication |
Date: | 2011-06-30 15:05:38 |
Message-ID: | 4E0C90C2.3000207@2ndQuadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On 06/30/2011 08:21 AM, abraao895 wrote:
> - The HD of the PC1(master) dead. The WAL file don't have replicated because
> it is a asynchronous proccess and suppose that this already didn't have
> happened.
>
> - The PC2(slave) doesn't have the last record.
>
That's exactly how some transaction loss can happen in this situation.
Some software worried about this problem maintains a small transaction
log outside of the database, so that it's possible to reconstruct really
critical information after such a disaster.
In PostgreSQL 9.1, due to be released later this year, synchronous
replication is available on a per-transaction basis. That resolves the
concern you have--important transactions can be confirmed on one of the
slaves as a requirement before they commit.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
Comprehensive and Customized PostgreSQL Training Classes:
http://www.2ndquadrant.us/postgresql-training/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mikko Partio | 2011-07-01 05:18:39 | PANIC while doing failover (streaming replication) |
Previous Message | Abraão Ferreira | 2011-06-30 13:26:09 | Re: Problem with Streaming Replication |