> > So your databases would listen on 5433, 5434, etc and the proxy would
> > listen on 5432 and route everything properly. If a particular cluster
> > is not up, the proxy could just error out the connection.
> > Hmm, that'd be fun to write if I ever find the time...
> It is similar to a proxy, yes, but that is just part of it. The setup
> and running of these systems should all be managed.
Per my earlier comment, this really seems like an obvious extension of
pgPool, or Sequoia if you're a java geek. No need to re-invent the wheel.
In terms of the PostgreSQL Core, though, Mark, it sounds like you're
treating the symptoms and not the causes. What you really need is a way
to load a large database very quickly (in binary form or otherwise)
without downing the cluster. This is a generally desired feature that has
been discussed several times on this list, and you could get general
agreement on easily.
The feature you proposed is a way to make your idiosyncratic setup easier
to manage, but doesn't apply to anyone else's problems on this list, so
you're going to have a hard time drumming up enthusiasm.
Aglio Database Solutions
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2006-02-03 18:35:28|
|Subject: Re: Passing arguments to views|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-02-03 18:07:22|
|Subject: Re: Passing arguments to views |
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2006-02-03 18:40:01|
|Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Fix for running from admin account on win32|
|Previous:||From: Chris Campbell||Date: 2006-02-03 17:44:00|
|Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases|