Fully agreed, and it's just a concept at the moment. After I have a
prototype standby working next week in the first place, we'll be discussing
those very merits.
A 2nd question: Is it possible to have 2 standby servers with a single
master duplicating to standby1 (at my coloc), and standby2 (at my office)?
Assume no auto-failover.
-----Original Message-----
From: Montaseri [mailto:montaseri@gmail.com]
Sent: Jun 26, 2008 12:51 PM
To: Simon Riggs
Cc: Scott Whitney; pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Warm standby server
I am not so sure of this arrangement's mertis
From HA (High Availability) point of view, the host/server is a single point
of failure which will bring your entire infrastructure down if any of the
server hardware components fail.
From Performance point of view, you have increased the load on your server
by 3 folds as all instances would be using your I/O bandwidth to write to
secondary storage
Given $300 to $400 price of headless servers these days, its much economical
to split the workload on three boxes
Cheers
Medi
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 10:19 -0500, Scott Whitney wrote:
> I've got 3 different database servers (db01, db02 and db03).
>
> I would like to have a WAL standby server that replays logs for
all 3 in
> case one goes down, so I can promote that particular server.
>
> Can I do this by installing 3 separate postmasters on this
machine?
> Obviously, if 2 went down at the same time, I'd have to do some
magic to
> bring up another machine, but I'm not sure that's a concern.
Yes, that will work.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
