| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig James <craig_james(at)emolecules(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Replication |
| Date: | 2007-06-19 21:22:49 |
| Message-ID: | 1182288169.1926.15.camel@dogma.v10.wvs |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 16:14 -0700, Craig James wrote:
> Looking for replication solutions, I find:
>
> Slony-I
> Seems good, single master only, master is a single point of failure,
> no good failover system for electing a new master or having a failed
> master rejoin the cluster. Slave databases are mostly for safety or
> for parallelizing queries for performance. Suffers from O(N^2)
> communications (N = cluster size).
>
There's MOVE SET which transfers the origin (master) from one node to
another without losing any committed transactions.
There's also FAILOVER, which can set a new origin even if the old origin
is completely gone, however you will lose the transactions that haven't
been replicated yet.
To have a new node join the cluster, you SUBSCRIBE SET, and you can MOVE
SET to it later if you want that to be the master.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-06-19 21:33:39 | Re: Maintenance question / DB size anomaly... |
| Previous Message | Campbell, Lance | 2007-06-19 20:35:18 | PostgreSQL Configuration Tool for Dummies |