Re: PostgreSQL advocacy

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Rakesh Kumar
Тема Re: PostgreSQL advocacy
Дата
Msg-id 56F01CEE.8050803@gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: PostgreSQL advocacy  (Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater@gmx.net>)
Ответы Re: PostgreSQL advocacy  ("Jernigan, Kevin" <kmj@amazon.com>)
Список pgsql-general
On 03/21/2016 10:57 AM, Thomas Kellerer wrote:

> So - at least as far as I can tell - it's usually only used where high-availability is really important, e.g. where
zero-downtimeis required. 
> If you can live with a short downtime, a hot standby is much cheaper and probably not that much slower.

Even the above statement can be challenged , given the rising popularity
of nosql databases which are all based on
eventual consistency (aka async replication).

A PG with BDR and an application designed to read/write only
one node via connection mapping can match the high availability
requirement of RAC.

BTW disk is a single point of failure in RAC.


В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Adrian Klaver
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [SQL] plan not correct?
Следующее
От: "Jernigan, Kevin"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PostgreSQL advocacy