Robert Treat wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 23:43, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > David Garamond wrote:
> > > >>Now suppose /disk1 fails, one of the shadow can be configured to
> > > >>immediately take over as the master database, without any down time. We
> > > >>can then add /disk4/dbname.fdb, for instance, to become a new shadow.
> > > >>
> > > >>Alternatively, when a shadow fails, IB/Firebird can refuse further
> > > >>transactions until there is another shadow coming up, so the database is
> > > >>shadowed all the time.
> > > >
> > > > No, we don't have plans to do that. We will allow continuous logging so
> > > > a tar backup plus this log will bring you up to current.
> > >
> > > What about the future synchronous replication or clustering? Will this
> > > feature do what shadowing in IB/FB does? Cause I've met a couple of
> > > people that really love this feature and they cling to FB because of this.
> > >
> > > Actually, what is needed is:
> > >
> > > - an exact mirror at all times;
> > > - a very simple, straightforward, and fast way to failover;
> > >
> > > done by software.
> >
> > I recommend they keep clinging. :-)
> >
>
> Should we recommend they submit a patch instead? :-)
>
> Seriously though this sounds like it could be an extension of the
> tablespaces implementation couldn't it?
They can do hardware mirroring, or software/OS mirroring. Why put that
in the database too? Seems like it would just complicate our code with
little payback.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073