Message-ID: <4DCC4B70.9020803@commandprompt.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 14:04:48 -0700
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Organization: Command Prompt, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Scaling
References: <BANLkTi=Mf9HeECcGPBun8+VUAK-m=awAew@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=Mf9HeECcGPBun8+VUAK-m=awAew@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 04/24/2011 03:21 PM, David Hornsby wrote:
> My SMB database is currently running on a HP-UX box running in a master
> - slave slonyI cluster to create a hot spare database. Recently the
> server has be getting hammered and we are consistently hitting our max
> db connections. We have our web CMS and our web apps, our desktop client
> apps, and a couple application servers running off of this database
> server and it is crumbling under the stress. Currently we have been
> doing table partitioning and table archiving to trim the fat off of the
> indexing processes etc.
>
> My project at hand is to upgrade this configuration to a linux cluster
> of servers, 2 - 3. The ideal solution is to just do load balancing
> through DNS requests and have 2 servers in a multi master configuration.
> So far we have not had any hardware issues on our current set up ( knock
> on wood). So in doing this I am not immediately looking for a hot spare
> set up. But in the future am looking at setting up a VPN tunnel to an
> offsite server and sending WAL updates to that.

You are more likely to need one master, two hot standbys and push your 
reads to the slaves.

JD
-- 
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
The PostgreSQL Conference - http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
@cmdpromptinc - @postgresconf - 509-416-6579