Re: High Availability with Postgres

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От John R Pierce
Тема Re: High Availability with Postgres
Дата
Msg-id 4C1E6714.1090202@hogranch.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: High Availability with Postgres  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Ответы Re: High Availability with Postgres  (Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>)
Re: High Availability with Postgres  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-general
On 06/20/10 10:36 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 07:34:10PM +0300, Elior Soliman wrote:
>
>> My company looking for some solution for High availability with Postgres.
>>
>> Our optional solution is as follows :
>> Two DB servers will be using a common external storage (with raid).
>>
> Stop right there.  This is the Oracle way of doing things, and it
> doesn't work for PostgreSQL.
>

Sure it does, as long as the database filesystem is only mounted on the
currently active server, and only that instance of postgres is running.
This is the traditional HA 'active/standby' server configuration.  Note,
I'm *not* talking about Oracle RAC active-active clustering.

This is also one of the only postgres HA configurations that won't lose
/any/ committed transactions on a failure.  Most all PITR/WAL
replication/Slony/etc configs, the standby storage runs several seconds
behind realtime.

Use a cluster manager, like Linux Heartbeat, Veritas Cluster, Sun
Cluster, etc, to manage the state transitions.


on a manual failover, the active server stops postgres, frees the shared
IP, umounts the shared storage, then the standby server fences the
formerly active server so it can't access the storage if it
accidentially tried, adopts the shared IP, mounts the shared storage,
starts postgres and is online.

on a failed server failover the standby server does the same thing.

the commercial cluster software vendors insist on using dedicated
connections for the heartbeat messages between the cluster members and
insist on having fencing capabilities (for instance, disabling the fiber
switch port of the formerly active server and enabling the port for the
to-be-activated server).  with linux-ha and heartbeat, you're on your own.

of course, a system like this, your external shared raid should itself
be redundant, and have controller failover abilities, and each cluster
server should have redundant connecctions to the two storage
controllers.  With fiberchannel you use two switches and two HBAs on
each node.  with iscsi, you'd use two ethernet switches and NICs on each
host.



В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Adrian von Bidder
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: A thought about other open source projects
Следующее
От: Raymond O'Donnell
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: High Availability with Postgres