Re: PostgreSQL clustering (shared disk) - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Douglas McNaught
Subject Re: PostgreSQL clustering (shared disk)
Date
Msg-id 87sl6jtuzj.fsf@suzuka.mcnaught.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL clustering (shared disk)  (Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@CommandPrompt.com>)
Responses Re: PostgreSQL clustering (shared disk)  ("Mikko Partio" <mpartio@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@CommandPrompt.com> writes:

>> What I'm pondering here is that is the cluster able to keep the
>> postmasters synchronized at all times so that the database won't get
>> corrupted.
>
> Keep all the $PGDATA in the shared disk. That would minimize data loss
> (Of course, there is still a risk of data loss -- the postmasters are
> not aware of each other and they don't share each other's buffers, etc.)

It would be much better to have the cluster software only run one
postmaster at a time, starting up the secondary if the primary fails.
That's the usual practice with shared storage.

-Doug

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: hubert depesz lubaczewski
Date:
Subject: Re: how to get id of currently executed query?
Next
From: Erik Jones
Date:
Subject: Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE performance costs? alternatives?