| From: | Gregg Jaskiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Scalable cluster |
| Date: | 2013-03-03 23:29:28 |
| Message-ID: | CAJY59_jFd+V3nsNGuz6aFzPHnPEqhU5PRKaJBFLfe2QsCvUi4w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 3 March 2013 22:56, John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> wrote:
>
> did you look at pgbouncer ? thats the simple pooler for postgres, and its
> quite robust, because its so simple.
>
>
Yes, it is one of the solutions I do consider. Having applications decide
whether they should write to master, or use slaves and/or master for read
queries (for instance in case it is a transaction, etc).
I wonder however, how others are handing it. There seems to be nothing out
there apart from pgbouncer and pgpool. And only the latter can handle
(albeit not really that quick) pooling between master and slaves.
How do you guys go about designing such cluster.
--
GJ
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ian Harding | 2013-03-04 04:27:32 | Fwd: pg_upgrade |
| Previous Message | John R Pierce | 2013-03-03 22:56:36 | Re: Scalable cluster |