MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Z_1Cq7JvabsFYjQo@ark>
 <CAKAnmmJxGHcQmzXqEQ-nppZjXyH7i5W_7Cz8JNMb2+6c5+D+og@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM527d9+eGvdih1GxoPDJ2WYs6eitf39oNTxGxnCK1PgF=A8wg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1798838.1744759182@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20FB597F-641F-48F8-8428-D8DDBA802D58@yandex-team.ru>
 <CAExHW5udz081Unx5qcLZ89DnR4cp6OhW0TCoco3+AEkGw480uQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <212D5973-FDD0-4CF5-BCD0-2760EC319DF3@yandex-team.ru>
 <CAExHW5tq8ShEfboFa52wDMWmyaW+6kX_6x8MZ-0TP65tOhJ1wQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAExHW5tq8ShEfboFa52wDMWmyaW+6kX_6x8MZ-0TP65tOhJ1wQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 15:29:05 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAKAnmm+QJnL_APyKhM3hjkOv9DXjWaqJxB2nFDuNH9JqVdTfXA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Built-in Raft replication
To: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>,
 Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik@postgres.ai>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008f02f50632ea4e7d"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKAnmm%2BQJnL_APyKhM3hjkOv9DXjWaqJxB2nFDuNH9JqVdTfXA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--0000000000008f02f50632ea4e7d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 2:18=E2=80=AFAM Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@=
gmail.com>
wrote:

> Users find it a waste of resources to deploy 3 big PostgreSQL instances
> just for HA where 2 suffice even if they deploy 3 lightweight DCS
> instances. Having only some of the nodes act as DCS and others purely
> PostgreSQL nodes will reduce waste of resources.
>

A big problem is that putting your DCS into Postgres means your whole
system is now super-sensitive to IO/WAL-streaming issues, and a busy
database doing database stuff is going to start affecting the DCS stuff.
With three lightweight DCS servers, you don't really need to worry about
how stressed the database servers are. In that way, I feel etcd et al. are
adhering to the unix philosophy of "do one thing, and do it well."

Cheers,
Greg

--
Crunchy Data - https://www.crunchydata.com
Enterprise Postgres Software Products & Tech Support

--0000000000008f02f50632ea4e7d
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 2:18=E2=80=AFAM A=
shutosh Bapat &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com">ashutosh.=
bapat.oss@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:</div><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quo=
te_container"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px=
 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Users find =
it a waste of resources to deploy 3 big PostgreSQL instances just for HA wh=
ere 2 suffice even if they deploy 3 lightweight DCS instances. Having only =
some of the nodes act as DCS and others purely PostgreSQL nodes will reduce=
 waste of resources.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>A big problem is t=
hat putting your DCS into Postgres means your whole system is now super-sen=
sitive to IO/WAL-streaming issues, and a busy database doing database=C2=A0=
stuff is going to start affecting the DCS stuff.=C2=A0 With three lightweig=
ht DCS servers, you don&#39;t really need to worry about how stressed the d=
atabase servers are. In that way, I feel etcd et al. are adhering to the un=
ix philosophy of &quot;do one thing, and do it well.&quot;</div></div><div>=
<br></div><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>=
Cheers,</div><div>Greg</div><div><br></div><div>--</div><div>Crunchy Data -=
 <a href=3D"https://www.crunchydata.com" target=3D"_blank">https://www.crun=
chydata.com</a></div><div>Enterprise Postgres Software Products &amp; Tech =
Support</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>

--0000000000008f02f50632ea4e7d--