From: | "Nicholson, Brad (Toronto, ON, CA)" <bnicholson(at)hp(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Chris Hoover <revoohc(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org Admin" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Question about multiple slaves and Master loss. |
Date: | 2011-12-07 17:58:44 |
Message-ID: | EC55DC235432104F8255702A8D7344D925702255@G9W0741.americas.hpqcorp.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
From: pgsql-admin-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org [mailto:pgsql-admin-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Chris Hoover
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 12:05 PM
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org Admin
Subject: [ADMIN] Question about multiple slaves and Master loss.
I'm pretty sure that the answer to this question is no, but I wanted to verify.
Given the following scenario (pg 9.0):
Server A (Master), Server B (A's streaming replication Slave), Server C (A's streaming replication Slave)
If you lose Server A, is there anyway to promote Server B to master and keep Server C as B's slave without having to rebuild C from a backup of B?
Basically, I'd like to be able to have 2 slaves running so that when the master goes down, we can bring one slave online, and still have the ability to very quickly recover if the new master where to fail before server A could be recovered.
Thanks,
Chris
Not that I am aware of. In practice though, C and B should me more or less equivalent so as long as you are using a differential copy like rsync you should be able to bring C up as a replica of B very quickly. There is of course a small window though where you are not protected.
Brad.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Evan Rempel | 2011-12-07 18:11:51 | Re: Question about multiple slaves and Master loss. |
Previous Message | Chris Hoover | 2011-12-07 17:04:33 | Question about multiple slaves and Master loss. |