On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 21:45, Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sounds somewhat evil, I know, but I was wondering if it was even > remotely possible with the current design? > > The reason: we are contemplating using pg_standy to create a > warm-standby. It would be a bonus if we would run read-only queries > against this DB to take some of the load off or production servers. > > We currently use slony to provide warm-standby *and* read-only access, > but pg_standby is a great deal more appealing...especially if there was > some way to do read-only access at the same time. > > FWIW, the data would not even need to be completely consistent ... the > kinds of things we are looking at offloading are large summary-type > sequential scans of big tables.
Uhh sounds like you are describing hot standby (currently in the works for 8.4) see: http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Hot_Standby http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-11/msg00005.php Synchronous replication might also be of interest http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-11/msg00987.php -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
