Re: [GENERAL] pgpool2 vs sequoia

2007-08-06 Thread Alexander Staubo
On 8/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the last few years we ran with horizontal partitioning. i always ran into > problems with horizontal partioning because few tables must be shared across > the databases and sometimes things are moving and i got lot of trouble with > my prima

Re: [GENERAL] pgpool2 vs sequoia

2007-08-06 Thread mljv
Thank you guys! But now i am clueless as before. please, enlighten me: i need about 200 concurrent db connections at peak time and - at the moment - i only have cheap hardware (2-4 GB Ram, Dual Opteron CPU, SATA Disks, RAID 1) My database has a size of 11 GigaByte, largest table has 100.000.000

Re: [GENERAL] pgpool2 vs sequoia

2007-08-06 Thread Markus Schiltknecht
Hi, David Fetter wrote: Very few people actually need synchronous replication, and those who do buy Oracle's RAC (and curse it) or use DB2's offering (and also curse it ;). For most purposes, fast asynchronous replication is good enough. While this is certainly true, please keep in mind that

Re: [GENERAL] pgpool2 vs sequoia

2007-08-03 Thread Joshua D. Drake
David Fetter wrote: On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 09:25:41AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2007 22:37 schrieben Sie: On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:58:40AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, i would like to use a statement replication for postgresql Why? i have read http:/

Re: [GENERAL] pgpool2 vs sequoia

2007-08-03 Thread David Fetter
On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 09:25:41AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2007 22:37 schrieben Sie: > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:58:40AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > i would like to use a statement replication for postgresql > > > > Why? > > i have re

Re: [GENERAL] pgpool2 vs sequoia

2007-08-03 Thread mljv
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2007 22:37 schrieben Sie: > On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:58:40AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi, > > > > i would like to use a statement replication for postgresql > > Why? i have read http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/high-availability.html i want 4 sy

Re: [GENERAL] pgpool2 vs sequoia

2007-08-02 Thread Andy Dale
Hi, I have some experience with HA-JDBC and on the whole it is pretty good (very easy to setup), with it's only sight weakness being it synchronisation (renders the DB read only) but this is to be improved in the future. I have tried to setup sequioa but it is pretty complex (and more heavyweigh

Re: [GENERAL] pgpool2 vs sequoia

2007-08-02 Thread mljv
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2007 12:04 schrieb Andy Dale: > Hi, > > You might also want to check out HA-JDBC at http://ha-jdbc.sourceforge.net thanks for this suggestion, so i have three options to choose from: - pgpool2 - sequoia - ha-jdbc Can someone share his experience on these? kind regards j

Re: [GENERAL] pgpool2 vs sequoia

2007-08-02 Thread Andy Dale
Hi, You might also want to check out HA-JDBC at http://ha-jdbc.sourceforge.net Cheers, Andy On 02/08/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > i would like to use a statement replication for postgresql > > i have found the following solutions: > - pgpool > - pgpool2 > - sequo