Re: Synchronization levels in SR
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Synchronization levels in SR |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1274911241.6203.3614.camel@ebony обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Synchronization levels in SR (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 17:31 -0400, Jan Wieck wrote: > You can do this only with per standby options, by giving each standby a > weight, or a number of votes. Your DEV server would have a weight of > zero, while your production standby's have higher weights, depending on > their importance for your overall infrastructure. As long as majority > means >50% of all votes in the house, you don't have a split brain risk. Yes, you could do that with per-standby options. If you give each standby a weight then the parameter has much less meaning for the user. It doesn't mean number of replicas any more, it means something else with local and changeable meaning. A fractional quorum suffers the same way. What would make some sense would be to have an option for "vote=0|1" so that a standby would never take part in the transaction sync when vote=0. But you still have the problem of specifying rules if insufficient servers with vote=1 are available. The reaction to that is to supply more servers with vote=1, though then you need a way to specify how many servers with vote=1 you care about. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: