Re: On "multi-master"

From: Alex Turner <armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Chris Travers <chris(at)metatrontech(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: On "multi-master"
Date: 2005-10-14 13:49:45
Message-ID: 33c6269f0510140649h610d22ect19ff383b624e6dbe@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

<snip>

> >multi-master. It provides a certain amount of scaling, but nothing
> >I've seen or heard suggests that the license cost couldn't just as
> >easily and effectively be thrown at larger hardware for better
> >scaling. The really big reason to use RAC is five-nines situations:
> >you're trying to make sure that even unlikely failures of your
> >machines never cause the database to stop working (for suitably
> >lawyer-understood values of "stop". RAC remastering is not a
> >zero-cost, nor even invisible, operation. But from an application
> >perspective, it can be made to look like "database is slow" as
> >opposed to "database crashed").
> >
> >
> So this is basically a multimaster synchronous replication solution
> utilizing a shared disk architecture. I generally agree with your
> assessment that the license costs could be better spent on redundant
> hardware and more scalable hardware. Also if the shared disk fails, you
> may lose everything after your last backup.

Of course thats highly unlikely because in Oracle you have _two_ complete
copies of your active database from your last backup with archive redo logs,
so in reality you would have to loose your _entire_ disk cluster, which if
you have things organised by the book, you would have archive redo on a
seperate controller, and preferably on a seperate array for that very
reason.

Oracle though this out pretty well ;)

<snip>

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Palle Girgensohn 2005-10-14 14:15:48 linking problems with Kerberos (heimdal) on FreeBSD
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2005-10-14 13:49:40 Re: Using LISTEN/NOTIFY in C#.NET