On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 07:32:24PM -0900, Joshua J. Kugler wrote:
- On Wednesday 11 November 2009, David Kerr said something like:
- > I'm trying to meet a very high uptime requirement in a high
- > performance environment.
-
- If you don't mind Xen, have you considered:
-
- http://dsg.cs.ubc.ca/
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:47 AM, David Kerr wrote:
> In your enviornment, are the applications able to recover automatically
> after
> a DB failover?
>
> For exmaple, we're using Java/JDBC connections +Geronimo we're researching
> whether
> or not JDBC/Geronimo would be able to retry in the case
On Wednesday 11 November 2009, David Kerr said something like:
> I'm trying to meet a very high uptime requirement in a high
> performance environment.
If you don't mind Xen, have you considered:
http://dsg.cs.ubc.ca/remus/ System mirroring/hot standby, with instant
failover, complete with any o
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 07:50:06AM +0200, Mikko Partio wrote:
- On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:28 PM, David Kerr wrote:
- > basically point to using a replication based solution, which i don't think
- > would meet my
- > performance demands.
- >
- > Does anyone have expereince with this or a similar se
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:28 PM, David Kerr wrote:
> What I plan on doing is:
>
> Postgres installed on a Cluster configured in active/passive (both pointing
> to the same SAN
> (If PG or the OS fails we trigger a failover to the passive node)
>
> Is this a common/reccomended method of handling c
Greg Smith wrote:
It sounds like you've got the basics nailed down here and are on a
well trod path, just one not one documented publicly very well. Since
you said that even DRBD was too much overhead for you, I think a dive
into evaluating the commercial clustering approaches (or the free
Li
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 01:35:58PM -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
- David Kerr wrote:
- >The apps actually aren't as robust as the DB in this case, so i'll have
- >time to
- >replay all of the logs that made it before "the big one" while those are
- >being
- >configured to come up. and if it does take
David Kerr wrote:
The apps actually aren't as robust as the DB in this case, so i'll have time to
replay all of the logs that made it before "the big one" while those are being
configured to come up. and if it does take longer that's not a huge issue
i'll have a few hours to get 100% caught up.
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 09:35:35AM -0800, Ben Chobot wrote:
- What are you trying to protect against? Software failure? Hardware
- failure? Both?
-
- Depending on your budget, you could theoretically point any number of
- failover nodes at a san, so long as you make sure only one of them is
- r
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 01:11:52PM -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
- David Kerr wrote:
- >Postgres installed on a Cluster configured in active/passive (both
- >pointing to the same SAN
- >(If PG or the OS fails we trigger a failover to the passive node)
- >Log shipping between that cluster and a single P
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 09:40:21AM -0800, John R Pierce wrote:
- David Kerr wrote:
- >Does anyone have expereince with this or a similar setup that they could
- >share with me?
- >
-
- thats your classic database cluster.the reason you don't see
- much of that in online writeups is tha
David Kerr wrote:
Postgres installed on a Cluster configured in active/passive (both pointing to
the same SAN
(If PG or the OS fails we trigger a failover to the passive node)
Log shipping between that cluster and a single PG Instance off site.
Is this a common/reccomended method of handling clu
John R Pierce wrote:
presumably you'd manage this with classic cluster managemetn software
(veritas cluster, sun cluster, redhat cluster, heartbeat, or whatever
is appropriate to your environment.
I've seen or heard of successful implementations like this done with
Veritas, Sun, RedHat, and Lin
Ben Chobot wrote:
Of course, you still have the single point of failure in the SAN.
a proper SAN has two switches, each host connected to it has two HBA
interfaces, there are two redundant storage controllers with mirrored
cache, dual paths from each controller to all the storage, and redunda
David Kerr wrote:
I'm trying to meet a very high uptime requirement in a high performance
environment.
to do this we will need to have some form of cluster for our databases
What I plan on doing is:
Postgres installed on a Cluster configured in active/passive (both pointing to
the same SAN
(
What are you trying to protect against? Software failure? Hardware
failure? Both?
Depending on your budget, you could theoretically point any number of
failover nodes at a san, so long as you make sure only one of them is
running postgres at a time. Of course, you still have the single point
I'm trying to meet a very high uptime requirement in a high performance
environment.
to do this we will need to have some form of cluster for our databases
What I plan on doing is:
Postgres installed on a Cluster configured in active/passive (both pointing to
the same SAN
(If PG or the OS fail
my
constraints.
Thanks,
Scot Kreienkamp
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Alan McKay
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 1:57 PM
To: pgsql-performa...@postgresql.org; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GE
> By the way: cross-posting on these lists is generally frowned upon. It
> causes problems for people who reply to you but are aren't on all of the
> lists you sent to. If you're not sure what list something should go on,
> just send it to -general rather than cc'ing multiple ones.
Duly noted!
On Wed, 27 May 2009, Alan McKay wrote:
Got any good pointers for reading material to help me get up to speed
on PostgreSQL clustering? What options are available? What are the
issues? Terminology.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Replication%2C_Clustering%2C_and_Connection_Pooling
is where
Hey folks,
I have done some googling and found a few things on the matter. But
am looking for some suggestions from the experts out there.
Got any good pointers for reading material to help me get up to speed
on PostgreSQL clustering? What options are available? What are the
issues? Terminol
] Postgres clustering?
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 03:22:02PM -0600, Keith Bottner wrote:
> I am very interested in a similar solution and believe that I could
> get some resources from my company for implementing such a system. Are
> you interested in helping to develop the functionality for
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 03:22:02PM -0600, Keith Bottner wrote:
> I am very interested in a similar solution and believe that I could get some
> resources from my company for implementing such a system. Are you interested
> in helping to develop the functionality for Postgres?
>
> Is anybody else i
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26.02.2004 22:22:02
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postgres clustering?
> There currently is no solution as I have asked this question quite a few
> times in the past.
[...]
Forgive me if you already get this:
I
24 matches
Mail list logo
