From: | ProAce <proace(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tatsuo Ishii" <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: High-Availability Question |
Date: | 2006-07-04 05:46:19 |
Message-ID: | 737a6d270607032246u2a68e154s6a26cdcadec5aa03@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> > First idea:
> > I install the pgpool on each web server (the web server farm include
> > 16 web servers), and configure the pgpool as replication mode. The web
> > application (written by php) access to the db server through the local
> > pgpool daemon.
> > The idea sounds a little unusual, dose it seems workable?
> > I just use very simple sql statment in the web application, no any
> > complex statment.
>
> This is not unusual and actualy I think it's a good idea. Also you
> could enjoy the advantage of the load-balance capability of pgpool in
> this case.
>
I say the idea is a little unusual because I'm concerned about the
health check status on each pgpool daemon ( on each web server ).
If the health check status is different from each pgpool, the data
will be not consistency.
Does any situation cause of the different health check status?
PS: My web server farm and database servers are not in the same
subnet, but the network architecture between those subnet is fully
redundancy. Even the db server binds two network interface to increase
the availability.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ivan Zolotukhin | 2006-07-04 07:35:13 | Re: High-Availability Question |
Previous Message | Alex Turner | 2006-07-04 02:24:39 | Re: RAID + PostgreSQL? |