Re: RAID0 and pg_xlog - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: RAID0 and pg_xlog
Date
Msg-id 20050909235416.GR7630@pervasive.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RAID0 and pg_xlog  (Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>)
Responses Re: RAID0 and pg_xlog
List pgsql-general
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 06:20:21PM -0500, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > pgpool is a connection pool; it has (almost) nothing to do with
> > replication. It certainly doesn't work to provide any kind of data
> > security on a RAID0 setup.
> >
> > I'm not arguing against anything people have suggested, only pointing
> > out that if you're using RAID0 your data is not safe against a drive
> > failure, except possible using pgcluster (some would argue that
> > statement-based replication isn't as reliable as log-based).
>
> Um.  No.  It has a synchronous replication mode, which I've used, and it
> works quite well.
>
> Look it up, it's pretty cool.  Writes to both pg machines synchronously,
> reads from them load balanced.  Of course, there are some limits imposed
> by this methodology, re: things like random() and such.
>
> Now, if you're arguing against statement based replication, that I can
> understand.  but pgpool can definitely do two box sync replication.

Oh, I didn't realize that. Though I have to wonder why they duplicated
what pgcluster provides...
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL - planet redundant data
Next
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: RAID0 and pg_xlog