Re: Geographical redundancy
От | Ben |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Geographical redundancy |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.64.0701021504270.8626@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Geographical redundancy (Dennis <aiwa_azca@yahoo.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
OK, well accepting data loss (even if it is "just" 6-12 hours worth) really opens up a lot of possibilities...... EXCEPT that you also said you want both sites to be able to modify data. Again, there is no real multi-master replication available for postgres, so you'll have to have both sites at least write to the same database server. On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Dennis wrote: > Well, I am mainly concerned with catastrophic failure. If 1st (main) > datacenter fails majorly (say fire, earthquake, db server dies etc), I > need to be able to restore websites/data quickly in another location. If > I get a data loss of say 6-12 hours during a major failure (which should > never occur), I am ok with that. > > Ben <bench@silentmedia.com> wrote: On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Dennis wrote: > >> I was thinking of maybe just having 2nd location receive a PG dump (full >> or incremental) every so often (an hour to 6 hours) and if the main >> location fails majorly, restore the PG cluster from the dump and switch >> DNS settings on the actual sites. I can make sure all website files are >> always in sync on both locations. > > Well, first off, you can just rsync your archived WAL files. That may be > easier than playing with pg_dump: > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/continuous-archiving.html > > But second, and more important given your data-loss desires, if you do it > this way you have a window where you can experience data loss. > Specifically, after a transaction is committed, that commit will be at > risk until the next transfer has completed. > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: