On Thu, 29 May 2008 09:22:26 -0700 Steve Atkins wrote:
> On May 29, 2008, at 9:12 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>
> > Either one of these would be great, but something that involves
> > machines that stay useless most of the time is just not going to work.
>
> I have customers who are thinking about warm standby functionality, and
> the only thing stopping them deploying it is complexity and maintenance,
> not the cost of the HA hardware. If trivial-to-deploy replication that
> didn't offer read-only access of the slaves were available today I'd bet
> that most of them would be using it.
Sure, have a similar customer. They are right now using a set of
Perl-scripts which ship the logfiles to the slave, take care of the
status, apply the logfiles, validate checksums ect ect. The whole thing
works very well in combination with RedHat cluster software, but it
took several weeks to implement the current solution.
Not everyone wants to spend the time and the manpower to implement a
"simple" replication.
Kind regards
--
Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
German PostgreSQL User Group
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
