Re: 24x7x365 high-volume ops ideas - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com |
---|---|
Subject | Re: 24x7x365 high-volume ops ideas |
Date | |
Msg-id | OFC728CBB4.98A95612-ON05256F4E.004792EC@ftw.us.ray.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | 24x7x365 high-volume ops ideas ("Ed L." <pgsql@bluepolka.net>) |
Responses |
Re: 24x7x365 high-volume ops ideas
|
List | pgsql-general |
Hi Chris and Karim, I haven't been following this thread, so excuse me if I suggest something that has already been tossed out. Solaris allows multiple IP addresses to be assigned to a single NIC. I just looked at the man page for Linux ifconfig but didn't see quickly how to do this. If Linux doesn't allow this, the same thing can be accomplished using multiple NICs per server. We reserve a special IP for the DB server. This IP can be assigned to the NIC of the machine currently hosting the database. If you want apps to connect to a different server, remove the IP from one machine and reassign it to the other. This special DB IP is assigned on top of the regular IP for the machine. Newly connecting apps are never the wiser, but existing connections must be terminated. machine A: (DB server) ifconfig hme0 192.1.1.1 up ifconfig hme0:1 192.1.1.100 up #special DB IP To change DB server from machine A to B: MachineB: (New DB server) ifconfig hme0 192.1.1.2 up ifconfig hme0:1 192.1.1.100 up Machine A: ifconfig hme0:1 down Hope this helps, Rick Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Sent by: cc: pgsql-general-owner@pos Subject: Re: [GENERAL] 24x7x365 high-volume ops ideas tgresql.org 11/15/2004 05:20 PM Karim.Nassar@NAU.EDU (Karim Nassar) writes: > On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 21:16, Christopher Browne wrote: >> None of these systems _directly_ address how apps would get pointed to >> the shifting servers. > <snip> >> Something needs to be "smart enough" to point apps to the right place; >> that's something to think about... > > Seems like it would be pretty easy to be smart in PHP: > > function db_connect() { > $conn = pg_connect("dbname='foo' user='dawg' password='HI!' > host='master'"); > if (!($conn AND (pg_connection_status($conn) == 0))) { > // problem with master > $conn = pg_connect("dbname='foo' user='dawg' password='HI!' > host='replica'"); > if ($conn AND (pg_connection_status($conn) == 0)) { > return $conn; > } > } else { > return $conn; > } > return NULL; > } > > Whatever client-side language one uses, the technique is the same > (though the coding style might differ :P ), can be used for > persistent connections (eg: with pg_pconnect in PHP), and seems like > it could be extended to any reasonable number of database servers. > > What is the problem with this? The only issue I can see is that > "replica" might be behind. Depending on the application, this might > not be bad. If the app MUST have the very most accurate DB, you > could remove the logic that connects to the replica, but then that > nullifies this whole conversation... The "problem" is that this requires modifications to the application, and communicating configuration changes gets that bit more complicated. Supposing, for instance, the code that accesses connections has already gotten wrapped in some more-or-less arcane object class specific to the application, it may be somewhat troublesome to make the modification. It would be attractive to allow the configuration change to take place outside the application in a manner that allows the application to be completely ignorant about it. By the way, your db_connect() suggestion doesn't cope with the problem where a connection is broken and the application continues to use that broken connection. There may be a need to cope with that... -- let name="cbbrowne" and tld="cbbrowne.com" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];; http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/linuxxian.html A VAX is virtually a computer, but not quite. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
pgsql-general by date: