On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 21:45, Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au> wrote:
>
> Sounds somewhat evil, I know, but I was wondering if it was even
> remotely possible with the current design?
>
> The reason: we are contemplating using pg_standy to create a
> warm-standby. It would be a bonus if we would run read-only queries
> against this DB to take some of the load off or production servers.
>
> We currently use slony to provide warm-standby *and* read-only access,
> but pg_standby is a great deal more appealing...especially if there was
> some way to do read-only access at the same time.
>
> FWIW, the data would not even need to be completely consistent ... the
> kinds of things we are looking at offloading are large summary-type
> sequential scans of big tables.
Uhh sounds like you are describing hot standby (currently in the works
for 8.4) see:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Hot_Standby
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-11/msg00005.php
Synchronous replication might also be of interest
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-11/msg00987.php
