Magnus Hagander a écrit :
> Since you're a Windows shop, you may already have the experience (and
> even liceneses perhaps?) to run Microsoft Cluster Service (part of 2003
> Enterprise Edition or 2000 Advanced Server). PostgreSQL will work fine
> with it. Works with shared disks using either fibrechannel or iSCSI.
>
> If you don't have the licenses for it already, it might turn out very
> expensive. And if you don't already have fibrechannel, that part is
> definitly expensive - but iSCSI could help you.
I am running Windows 2000 Server (the "normal" edition, not the
"advanced" one), so I don't have the cluster service available.
> If you're willing to move off Windows for the server platform, you could
> look at one of the solutions like slony+pgpool, or maybe DRBD+linux/ha.
> That'll be less expensive in both hardware and licenses, but if you
> don't have the people to maintain a new platform for it that's likely to
> be prohibitive.
I don't have the Linux knowledge to move from windows unfortunately.
Otherwise, is the clustering service really necessary ?
Aren't there simple "virtual IP addresses" solutions available ?
I could have a single virtual IP for the 2 servers, and having an
automatic failover if the master server is down ? The slave would
never be accessed by clients directly (only after a failover) but
would by synchronized with the master (slony-I).
Does this kind of software exist in the windows world ?
--
Arnaud