Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Looking for a better approach for pacemaker, DRDB VS pgsql 9.1 standby feature.

From: Amador Alvarez <aalvarez(at)d2(dot)com>
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Looking for a better approach for pacemaker, DRDB VS pgsql 9.1 standby feature.
Date: 2012-08-27 19:12:22
Message-ID: 503BC696.2080706@d2.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
Hi there,
I am setting up a 2 node database cluster (Master/standby) on pgsql 9.1 
and it looks to me that drdb option could be easier to maintain & keep 
running after several failovers on a row, specially because after a 
failover operation it is not too friendly to set back up automatically 
the former primary as the new standby. Besides I would not like to 
automate an rsync over the same data directory as it could be destroyed 
by a 'wrong' syncing .
Any comments are welcome !

Thanks in advance,
A.A.


pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Rural HunterDate: 2012-08-28 04:42:30
Subject: Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2012-08-27 13:58:52
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Repeatable crash in pg_dump (with -d2 info)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group