| From: | Thomas Poty <thomas(dot)poty(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | dmaziuk(at)bmrb(dot)wisc(dot)edu |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: increasing HA |
| Date: | 2018-09-05 15:45:05 |
| Message-ID: | CAN_ctnj1jrABJUdwgAfLWhwn6nkWPa1=tKKD3+cDLnOPcALaGQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> How many nodes do you want run? Keep in mind that with only 2 nodes,
fencing off the right one is by definition an undecidable problem. That's
one of the features of the current linux HA stack that makes one want to go
BSD/CARP.
>
> And if you want to run fully distributed, you might want to look at redis
in the first place.
We have one master and 2 slaves so 3 nodes
Le mer. 5 sept. 2018 à 16:42, Dmitri Maziuk <dmaziuk(at)bmrb(dot)wisc(dot)edu> a
écrit :
> On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 13:23:41 +0200
> Thomas Poty <thomas(dot)poty(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > At first glance, i may use for automatic failover PAF, a proxy HAproxy
> and
> > for fencincg, i am a bit disappointed, i don't know what to do/use
>
> How many nodes do you want run? Keep in mind that with only 2 nodes,
> fencing off the right one is by definition an undecidable problem. That's
> one of the features of the current linux HA stack that makes one want to go
> BSD/CARP.
>
> And if you want to run fully distributed, you might want to look at redis
> in the first place.
>
> --
> Dmitri Maziuk <dmaziuk(at)bmrb(dot)wisc(dot)edu>
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Paul Jungwirth | 2018-09-05 16:35:27 | Full table lock dropping a foreign key |
| Previous Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2018-09-05 15:31:42 | Re: PostgreSQL intenal scheduler? |