On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Serge Fonville
<serge.fonville@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks all for the responses,
>>
>> We're very happy with pgpool-II for load-balancing and multi-master
>>
>> usage of PostgreSQL (keep in mind to enable HA for pgpool-II itself to
>>
>> avoid a SPOF, e.g. with heartbeat).
>
> I could not determine whether pgpool-II is suitable for what I want.
> It does not seem to support multimaster in the fashion I had in mind, based
> on the information on the website it looks like it does not support full
> CRUD on any node.
So, what design criteria are you using that says multi-master is a
better choice than master / slave? I know that multi-master is
buzzword compliant, but often the actual product you get with it isn't
any better, and in some cases worse, than a master / slave setup.
> The most suitable solution seems to be LVS for a shared IP, ldirectord for
> load balancing and cybercluster for the database
> replication/synchronization.
Again, this is a lot of work to avoid master / slave with failover.
Are you sure it's really needed for your situation?
