Обсуждение: high-availability on MS Windows cluster -- need insights
I'm looking for someone to help me understand the tradeoffs/alternatives/problems for high-availability on MS Windows clusters. Willing to do it on this emaillist, but if that is too much traffic, can go direct email or phone.
I'm not actually the end-user/DBA for the task. I'm (among other tasks) the Boeing OSS Toolkit product manager. Postgresql is one of the (currently) 500 packages. I provide support for selection, build/install/configure/use on a variety of UNIX and Linux systems, from laptops to mainframes, plus (usually binary) installs on various MS Windows systems.
A user asked for help re high-availability on MS Windows. While I'm semi-competent with postgresql on single machines, I'm no cluster guru and only do MS Windows under duress. After some searching and reading, I asked for help on comp.databases.postgresql, where I was redirected to this maillist.
Harry George harry.g.george@boeing.com 425-717-7403
Notice: This communication may contain sensitive information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you have received this communication in error, do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Respond to the sender that you have received this e-mail in error, and delete the copy you received.
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 07:45:36AM -0800, George, Harry G wrote: > A user asked for help re high-availability on MS Windows. While I'm Well, the first thing to do is define what you mean by "high availability". There's a good discussion of this in the manual. The manual does not, however, go over all the options you might have; so once you've determined which problem(s) you're trying to solve, we might be able to help you :) > Notice: This communication may contain sensitive information. If you [&c.] Just to warn you, there are some people around here who are very sensitive tot hese sorts of automatic corporate-policy footers. If you can disable it for sending to the list, that'd be good. (If you can get your legal department to understand why it's bad to append such things in a public posting, even better.) A
Good points. FYI, I read the 8.2.5 manual, then did some additional searching, and reviewed Elmasri "Fundamentals of Database Systems, 3rd ed (text from MS CompSci course on DBMS design). Then emailed an analysis and the tradeoffs as best I understood them to the user and requested additional info and requirements (no response so far -- holidays). Also Only then did I begin posting requests for help, in preparation for getting those answers back from the user. It is beginning to sound like I should have waited until we had the prototype testbed up and running, and then post specific questions when we ran into roadblocks. I was just hoping to leverage the experience of others to avoid the roadblocks in the first place. Sorry about the signature line. It is required here. However, I'll try posting from home in the future. > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:ajs@crankycanuck.ca] > Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 9:31 AM > To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [ADMIN] high-availability on MS Windows cluster > -- need insights > > On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 07:45:36AM -0800, George, Harry G wrote: > > A user asked for help re high-availability on MS Windows. > While I'm > > Well, the first thing to do is define what you mean by "high > availability". > There's a good discussion of this in the manual. The manual > does not, however, go over all the options you might have; so > once you've determined which problem(s) you're trying to > solve, we might be able to help you :) > > > Notice: This communication may contain sensitive > information. If you > > [&c.] Just to warn you, there are some people around here who > are very sensitive tot hese sorts of automatic > corporate-policy footers. If you can disable it for sending > to the list, that'd be good. (If you can get your legal > department to understand why it's bad to append such things > in a public posting, even better.) > > A > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings >
>> Notice: This communication may contain sensitive information. If you > > [&c.] Just to warn you, there are some people around here who are very > sensitive tot hese sorts of automatic corporate-policy footers. If you can Yes and those "people", need to get a life. I find it ever interesting that we continue to warn poor folks that have zero control from their corporate overlords about the stupid legal communications policies they have in place. Every single one of the people that gets reminded of this is going to respond, "Yes, I know... but it is out of my hands." So why do we continue to beat the cat? It's dead. > disable it for sending to the list, that'd be good. (If you can get your > legal department to understand why it's bad to append such things in a > public posting, even better.) What needs to happen (and I believe has on -patches) is that the subscription notice to all members needs to read that all confidentiality and legal notices will be ignored as this is an open forum. Secondly, people need to leave the poor guys alone that have no choice but to send email with that footer. These "notices" are going to continue and they are going to get ever more popular, especially as our Win32/MS market share increases. Lastly, perhaps a FAQ entry would be helpful. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 11:52:28AM -0800, George, Harry G wrote: > ed (text from MS CompSci course on DBMS design). Then emailed an > analysis and the tradeoffs as best I understood them to the user and > requested additional info and requirements (no response so far -- > holidays). Also Only then did I begin posting requests for help, in > preparation for getting those answers back from the user. Ok, well, let us know what you learn. I'm happy to share what I know (it ain't much, as anyone who knows me will tell you), but without a more specific use-case, it's hard to say anything. > Sorry about the signature line. It is required here. However, I'll try > posting from home in the future. I don't care, myself. It's just one of those things that get some people's back up, and they won't respond to messages with them attached. A
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > I find it ever interesting > that we continue to warn poor folks that have zero control from their > corporate overlords about the stupid legal communications policies they > have in place. > > Every single one of the people that gets reminded of this is going to > respond, "Yes, I know... but it is out of my hands." So why do we > continue to beat the cat? It's dead. > >> disable it for sending to the list, that'd be good. (If you can get your >> legal department to understand why it's bad to append such things in a >> public posting, even better.) > > What needs to happen (and I believe has on -patches) is that the > subscription notice to all members needs to read that all > confidentiality and legal notices will be ignored as this is an open forum. > > Secondly, people need to leave the poor guys alone that have no choice > but to send email with that footer. These "notices" are going to > continue and they are going to get ever more popular, especially as our > Win32/MS market share increases. The benefit of all these auto-generated confidentiality notices to public boards is that they open up the corporate information they ostensibly protect. We should encourage all companies to use them, so that they invalidate all their confidentiality markups and are forced to reveal all their secrets to the world. This will benefit the free and open interchange of information. -- Lew