From: Brad Nicholson <bnichols@ca.afilias.info>
To: Kasia Tuszynska <ktuszynska@esri.com>
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: High Availability: Hot Standby vs. Warm Standby
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 15:23:23 -0400
Message-ID: <1278703403.1914.236.camel@bnicholson-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <232B5217AD58584C87019E8933556D11020F195450@redmx2.esri.com>
References: <i172f8$kug$1@dough.gmane.org>
<AANLkTilFPekuBaypffaEgBxjreDdusVhqz0mSE_paJ8g@mail.gmail.com>
<i17itq$g11$1@dough.gmane.org>
<1278695920.1914.55.camel@bnicholson-desktop>
<232B5217AD58584C87019E8933556D11020F195450@redmx2.esri.com>
On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 10:25 -0700, Kasia Tuszynska wrote:
> Since the topic is very relevant to me right now I would like to ask if anyone is running a HA solution in the cloud?
While running databases in a cloud does come with it's own set of
issues/challenges, I don't see what would be materially different about
implementation of (most) HA solutions for Postgres in the cloud vs
standalone servers.
If you have specific questions or concerns, perhaps we could be of
assistance.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Brad Nicholson
> Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 10:19 AM
> To: Thomas Kellerer
> Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] High Availability: Hot Standby vs. Warm Standby
>
> On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 18:31 +0200, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Rob Wultsch wrote on 09.07.2010 18:14:
> > >> I am aware that I can use the 9.0 standby server for read only queries, but
> > >> that is (currently) not something we need
> > >>
> > >
> > > Taking SQL backups without impacting the master might be something to consider.
> >
> > Interesting point. Thanks for mentioning that.
>
> There is an issue with running your backup from a standby that you need
> to be aware of.
>
> There is potential that a long running query on the standby can conflict
> with the application of wal records. In this case, you have a choice to
> either terminate the query and let wal records continue to be applied,
> or delay the application of the wal until the query completes.
>
> Considering that you are looking at HA and asking about the difference
> in lost transactions between streaming replication and 8.4 PITR, I doubt
> that letting the standby lag for the duration of the pg_dump is going to
> be something that interests you.
>
> Full details are here:
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/hot-standby.html#HOT-STANDBY-CONFLICT
>
> --
> Brad Nicholson 416-673-4106
> Database Administrator, Afilias Canada Corp.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
>
>
--
Brad Nicholson 416-673-4106
Database Administrator, Afilias Canada Corp.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: bnichols@ca.afilias.info, ktuszynska@esri.com
Subject: Re: High Availability: Hot Standby vs. Warm Standby
In-Reply-To: <1278703403.1914.236.camel@bnicholson-desktop>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox