| From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com |
| Cc: | inzamam(dot)shafiq(at)hotmail(dot)com, cyberdemn(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Patroni vs pgpool II |
| Date: | 2023-04-07 12:16:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20230407.211604.225353179882549731.t-ishii@sranhm.sra.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
>> If node 1 hangs and once it is recognized as "down" by other nodes, it will
>> not be used without manual intervention. Thus the disaster described above
>> will not happen in pgpool.
>
> Ok, so I suppose **all** connections, scripts, softwares, backups, maintenances
> and admins must go through Pgpool to be sure to hit the correct primary.
>
> This might be acceptable in some situation, but I wouldn't call that an
> anti-split-brain solution. It's some kind of «software hiding the rogue node
> behind a curtain and pretend it doesn't exist anymore»
You can call Pgpool-II whatever you like. Important thing for me (and
probably for users) is, if it can solve user's problem or not.
Best reagards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS LLC
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter J. Holzer | 2023-04-07 14:10:20 | Re: "PANIC: could not open critical system index 2662" - twice |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2023-04-07 12:10:42 | Re: Patroni vs pgpool II |