| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Would you ever recommend Shared Disk Failover for HA? |
| Date: | 2024-02-23 09:08:14 |
| Message-ID: | fa2bd3bec91dcf0c206931a3cfc0f31a46a6ea44.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Fri, 2024-02-23 at 02:21 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 2:02 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> > Anyway, my personal experience with a shared disk setup is a bad one.
> >
> > Imagine two nodes, redundantly attached to disks mirrored across data
> > centers with fibrechannel. No single point of failure, right?
> > Well, one day one of the fibrechannel cables had intermittent failures,
> > which led to a corrupted file system.
> > So we ended up with a currupted file system, nicely mirrored across
> > data centers. We had to restore the 3TB database from backup.
>
> 1. Sounds like both nodes were turned on.
Possible, but I think that's not relevant.
> 2. Couldn't this happen in /any/ SAN with redundant cabling?
I'd say yes, and the redundant cabling is irrelevant too - I just
wanted to emphasize that hardware redundancy is not enough.
The single point of failure was the file system.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2024-02-23 12:44:56 | Re: print cached SQL plans of a backend |
| Previous Message | Gabriel Guillem Barceló Soteras | 2024-02-23 08:02:45 | Re: Use AD-account as login into Postgres. |