| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dim(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2008-05-29 22:29:01 |
| Message-ID: | 7898.1212100141@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine <dim(at)hi-media(dot)com> writes:
> While at it, would it be possible for the "simple" part of the core
> team statement to include automatic failover?
No, I think it would be a useless expenditure of energy. Failover
includes a lot of things that are not within our purview: switching
IP addresses to point to the new server, some kind of STONITH solution
to keep the original master from coming back to life, etc. Moreover
there are already projects/products concerned with those issues.
It might be useful to document where to find solutions to that problem,
but we can't take it on as part of core Postgres.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-05-29 22:39:53 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2008-05-29 22:12:31 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-05-29 22:39:53 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2008-05-29 22:21:19 | Re: Hint Bits and Write I/O |