On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 12:08:57PM -0700, Steve Atkins wrote:
>
> You can't do it by sharing the disk files, at all. The two instances will
> trash each others data.
>
Right. This is why products that do this sort of hardware fail-over
have something akin to the "STONITH" (Shoot The Other Node
On 2013-08-06 15:28, John McKown wrote:
Me again. Perhaps what is needed, in this case, is for a "distributor"
which "looks like" a PostgreSQL server running on a given system (i.e.
it is listening on the default TCPIP ports and UNIX sockets and
) but would simply act like a pipe to and
from t
Me again. Perhaps what is needed, in this case, is for a "distributor"
which "looks like" a PostgreSQL server running on a given system (i.e. it
is listening on the default TCPIP ports and UNIX sockets and ) but would simply act like a pipe to and from the
real server running somewhere else.
--
A
On 8/6/2013 10:45 AM, JD Wong wrote:
I tried moving the data directory over to the mounted drive, and
pointing both postgresql.confs to that one. I was able to have both
access the same databases, but they can't share changes. It's like
they're running on two separate data directories, even
On Aug 6, 2013, at 10:45 AM, JD Wong wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I have two servers, which share a large mounted drive. I would like to share
> postgres databases between them dynamically so that when one makes changes,
> they are immediately available in the other.
>
> I tried moving the data d
You can't just make them share the data dir (for example: what about
caches in memory?)
Probably what you want is streaming replication:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Streaming_Replication
Regards.
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 7:45 PM, JD Wong wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I have two servers, which share a
