On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 17:52, Dennis Gearon wrote:
> Are these clusters physically together using dedicate LAN lines or
> are they synchronizing over the Interwait?
There have been multiple methods over the years. In order:
1. Cluster Interconnect (CI) : There's a big box, called the CI,
Are these clusters physically together using dedicate LAN lines or
are they synchronizing over the Interwait?
Ron Johnson wrote:
On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 16:00, Jan Wieck wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Notes:
a) this is, of course, not *sufficient* for multi-master
b) yes, you need a fast,
On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 22:37, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If you can detect if outside transactions conflict with your
> > transaction, you should be able to determine if the outside transactions
> > conflict with each other.
>
> Uh ... not necessarily. That amo
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
>> What makes you say that? My understanding is it's supposed to survive
>> loss of individual servers.
> How does it play 'catch up' went a server comes back online?
The recovered server has to run through the
Chris Travers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes I have. Postgres-r is not a high-availability solution which is
> capable of transparent failover,
What makes you say that? My understanding is it's supposed to survive
loss of individual servers.
regards, tom lane
---
Tom Lane wrote:
Chris Travers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yes I have. Postgres-r is not a high-availability solution which is
capable of transparent failover,
What makes you say that? My understanding is it's supposed to survive
loss of individual servers.
regards, tom lane
My mis
