> I'm not suggesting that it's the place of pgpool to *force* a failover. I
> am suggesting that one of the criteria that is likely to be useful is the
> inability to connect to the master, and that's something that pgpool,
> apparently, detects. It seems unnecessary to use completely different
> failure-detection mechanisms for the purpose of failover to those used for
> the connection management.
>
> So all I'm looking for is a way for pgpool to shout if it detects a failure.
> That could initiate the investigation of the other criteria required for
> failover.
It's pretty easy. See main.c:failover_handler() for more details.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
> > The last thing in the world you need is to fail over to a slave because
> > somebody accidently tripped over a network cord.
>
> In our application, that's *exactly* what we need. We have a database that
> receives data in a fairly continuous stream. If the datastream cannot be
> written to the database, the database becomes worse than useless quite
> rapidly. We need the ability to switchover or failover to another node as
> master as soon as possible, to allow the datastream to be written to the
> other node. We'll rebuild the "failed" master later, if necessary. But if
> the failover doesn't happen promptly, we might as well rebuild the whole
> cluster.
>
> Julian Scarfe
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>