On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > On 2/25/11 4:57 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: >> On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 15:44 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: >>> Hmmm, I don't follow this. The user can only disable syncrep for their >>> own transactions. If they don't care about the persistence of their >>> transaction post-failover, why should the DBA care? >> >> I think that's the difference between failover and switchover, right? At >> least Slony makes such a distinction, as well. > > Yeah. Actually, what would be even simpler and more to the point would > be a command that says "flush all transactions from Server A to Server > B, then fail over".
That would be nice; I'm basically abusing syncrep to this purpose. At the same time, someone may need to be notified of such a switchover occurring, and in event of failure, it'd be nice to bounce back to the primary. Tangentially relevent, Virtual IP is not always an option, such as on Amazon EC2. But I digress. Such a command is unlikely to make it into 9.1; maybe we can circle around on that in 9.2. -- fdr -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
