Well, I am mainly concerned with catastrophic failure. If 1st (main) datacenter fails majorly (say fire, earthquake, db server dies etc), I need to be able to restore websites/data quickly in another location. If I get a data loss of say 6-12 hours during a major failure (which should never occur), I am ok with that.
Ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Dennis wrote: > I was thinking of maybe just having 2nd location receive a PG dump (full > or incremental) every so often (an hour to 6 hours) and if the main > location fails majorly, restore the PG cluster from the dump and switch > DNS settings on the actual sites. I can make sure all website files are > always in sync on both locations. Well, first off, you can just rsync your archived WAL files. That may be easier than playing with pg_dump: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/continuous-archiving.html But second, and more important given your data-loss desires, if you do it this way you have a window where you can experience data loss. Specifically, after a transaction is committed, that commit will be at risk until the next transfer has completed. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
