From: | Stuart Bishop <stuart(at)stuartbishop(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jerry Richards <jerry(dot)richards(at)teotech(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Is Synchronous Postgresql Replication Slower Than Asynchronous? |
Date: | 2012-01-23 15:13:00 |
Message-ID: | CADmi=6Pxe9-wKojJOcXETRoHMqyYf2DPzvJN6hzzsir6NbYs4w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Stuart Bishop <stuart(at)stuartbishop(dot)net> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 3:31 AM, Jerry Richards
>> <jerry(dot)richards(at)teotech(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Is synchronous postgresql replication slower than asynchronous? If so, how
>>> much? I am looking into database replication for a phone system, so the
>>> response time is of concern.
>>
>> You might want to investigate pgpool-ii. It sits as a proxy between
>> the client and the databases, and as queries are executed
>> simultaneously, a synchronous replication setup should be just as fast
>> as an unreplicated setup.
>
> Can you share your actual results on that?
No. This is based on my assumptions from the design, not from actual
tests. I'm currently asynchronously replicated with Slony-I and
looking at PG 9.1 builtin replication for our simpler clusters.
--
Stuart Bishop <stuart(at)stuartbishop(dot)net>
http://www.stuartbishop.net/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2012-01-23 15:13:10 | Re: update with from |
Previous Message | G_Hosa_Phat | 2012-01-23 15:06:17 | Re: "could not accept SSPI security context" |