Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D7206326AD for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 17:27:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 35810-06 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 20:26:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mole.comp.uvic.ca (mole.comp.uvic.ca [142.104.5.70]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E0F76325EC for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 17:26:54 -0300 (ADT) Received: from strike.comp.uvic.ca (strike.comp.uvic.ca [142.104.191.242]) by mole.comp.uvic.ca (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o4AKQpEW015432 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 13:26:51 -0700 Message-ID: <4BE86C0B.4080808@uvic.ca> Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 13:26:51 -0700 From: Evan Rempel User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090825) MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: "pgsql-admin@postgresql.org" Subject: PgPool-II - does it do re-connect? References: <4BB32420.2080707@greenmice.info> <4BB32E2F.8030304@2ndquadrant.com> In-Reply-To: <4BB32E2F.8030304@2ndquadrant.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UVic-Virus-Scanned: OK - Passed virus scan by ClamAV (clamd) on mole X-UVic-Scan: mole.comp.uvic.ca filter_version 3.1.30 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 142.104.5.72 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.01 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_40=-0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 201005/116 X-Sequence-Number: 34589 I am looking ahead to when postgresql 9.x is non-beta and how we can best make use of the "virtually synchronous" replication. At our site, we have a load balancer appliance that works very well in that it can direct a connection to one of a number of back ends. When one back end goes away, connections will be created to the remaining back ends. I think that this will work well for the postgres failover, however, the database connection will drop (I don't see how existing connections can be failed to the hot-standby postgres server) and need to be established again. Since I can not rely on the applications to perform the reconnect, I was wondering if anyone knows if PgPool-II can accomplish this for me. If it can, then the applications will not be aware that they have been reconnected, they will just be aware that any outstanding transaction failed. Can anyone comment on this functionality of PgPool-II or on this approach to failover in general? Evan Rempel.