Re: Postgres High Availablity Solution needed for hot-standby and load balancing

On 01.12.2007, at 09:35, Ragnar Heil wrote:

> WHich solution are you using now, Guido?

For the one installation we needed multi-master, we have FrontBase
running.

PostgreSQL multi-master just wasn't "right" for us. Too much hardware
needed to get real redundancy, the setup is too complex and didn't
provide what we needed: multi-master replication with two machines for
real redundancy not really performance (which is good enough with one
simple, cheap server), load-balancing is done in the apps (we have
instances connecting to one or the other server), automatic failover
in case of one server goes down. If we want to bring it back up, it's
a matter of some really simple commands and it synchronizes itself
with the master, no copying of files, no complex scripting, no complex
procedures at all.

Performance of one PostgreSQL server would be faster compared to that
setup, at least for the load we have, as FrontBase seems to be getting
slower with inserting in large tables with complex indexes. PostgreSQL
index creation is way faster. There are also other annoying things we
have seen, but overall the solution works fine.

cug