| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Standalone synchronous master |
| Date: | 2014-01-10 22:44:28 |
| Message-ID: | 52D077CC.6090308@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/10/2014 02:33 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2014-01-10 14:29:58 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> db02 goes down. It doesn't matter why. It is down. db01 continues to accept
>> orders, allow people to log into the website and we can still service
>> accounts. The continuity of service continues.
>
> Why is that configuration advantageous over a async configuration is the
> question. Why, with those requirements, are you using a synchronous
> standby at all?
If the master goes down, I can fail over knowing that as many of my
transactions as possible have been replicated.
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 509-416-6579
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC, @cmdpromptinc
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary
act.", George Orwell
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-01-10 22:45:22 | Re: Standalone synchronous master |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2014-01-10 22:41:18 | Re: Standalone synchronous master |