From: | Szymon Guz <mabewlun(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ireneusz Pluta <ipluta(at)wp(dot)pl> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: question about readonly instances |
Date: | 2011-05-18 20:33:24 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTi=N6rGocexLTFpApXp+poxjYKuMZQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 18 May 2011 22:22, Ireneusz Pluta <ipluta(at)wp(dot)pl> wrote:
> W dniu 2011-05-18 13:21, Szymon Guz pisze:
>
> Hi,
>> I've got a question about quite a strange configuration.
>> I was asked if we can have one storage, with one data directory where one
>> postgresql instance writes data, and many other instances read those.
>> Is that possible without any replication and copying data?
>>
>
> Why do they think they need that?
>
They've got some quite nice and huge storage and it would be nice to use it
from many different machines running postgreses.
Another option is Oracle which can do that. Replicating data to another
directory is not an option, not for this amount of data and the way of
loading/using data they need.
I've always done that using replication to different machines and running
there Postgres on each, I've never heard of this kind of using Postgres.
That's why I think this is "strange".
regards
Szymon
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bret Stern | 2011-05-18 20:39:35 | Using libpq with Visual Studio 2008 |
Previous Message | Ireneusz Pluta | 2011-05-18 20:22:29 | Re: question about readonly instances |