Re: Proposal: Implement failover on libpq connect level.

From: PostgreSQL - Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
Cc: Victor Wagner *EXTERN* <vitus(at)wagner(dot)pp(dot)ru>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Implement failover on libpq connect level.
Date: 2015-08-18 10:07:10
Message-ID: 64ED0EEC-49B3-404F-839E-6C0EE5554AFE@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc


> On 18 Aug 2015, at 11:19, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> wrote:
>
> Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote:
>> in addition to that you have the “problem” of transactions. if you failover in the middle
>> of a transaction, strange things might happen from the application point of view.
>>
>> the good thing, however, is that stupid middleware is sometimes not able to handle
>> failed connections. however, overall i think it is more of a danger than a benefit.
>
> Maybe I misunderstood the original proposal, but my impression was that the alternative
> servers would be tried only at the time the connection is established, and there would be no
> such problems as you describe.

it would still leave the problem of having a read only on the other side unless you are using BDR or so.

regards,

hans

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2015-08-18 10:30:20 Declarative partitioning
Previous Message Albe Laurenz 2015-08-18 09:19:03 Re: Proposal: Implement failover on libpq connect level.

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-08-18 16:37:58 Re: Proposal: Implement failover on libpq connect level.
Previous Message Albe Laurenz 2015-08-18 09:19:03 Re: Proposal: Implement failover on libpq connect level.