From: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Lincoln Yeoh" <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my>, "Arnaud Lesauvage" <thewild(at)freesurf(dot)fr>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Best high availability solution ? |
Date: | 2006-05-31 13:51:12 |
Message-ID: | 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA35468@algol.sollentuna.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> >Since you're a Windows shop, you may already have the
> experience (and
> >even liceneses perhaps?) to run Microsoft Cluster Service
> (part of 2003
> >Enterprise Edition or 2000 Advanced Server). PostgreSQL will
> work fine
> >with it. Works with shared disks using either fibrechannel or iSCSI.
>
> Are you sure that will really work?
Yes. I have used it.
> I thought Postgresql requires shared memory amongst the
> processes. Is that not true on the Windows platform?
Oh it does. Makes no change.
Microsoft Cluster Service is an active/passive failover clustering
solutino. PostgreSQL will only be *active* on one node at a time. So
shared memory stuff is not affected in any way.
(You can make it actiev/active by running two separate postgresql
installations on the two nodes, with failover-with-lower-performance,
but it's not a load-sharing cluster solution of any time)
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ludwig Isaac Lim | 2006-05-31 13:51:35 | Re: PGSQL 7.4 -> 8.1 migration & performance problem |
Previous Message | Lincoln Yeoh | 2006-05-31 13:42:05 | Re: Best high availability solution ? |