X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A19BE9FA4C1 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:16:09 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 65507-04 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:15:58 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from fw.greenpeace.org (fw.greenpeace.org [212.19.215.77]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6879FA4A6 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:15:55 -0300 (ADT) Received: (from root@localhost) by fw.greenpeace.org (8.9.3c/8.6.12) id KAA91604 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:15:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: by fw.greenpeace.org (TUNIX/Firewall SMTP Server) for id sma090309; Thu, 15 Jun 06 10:14:32 +0200 Received: from bb.nli.gl3 (root@localhost) by bb.nli.gl3 (8.12.8/8.12.5) with SMTP id k5F8EWoH028077 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:14:32 +0200 Received: from maila.greenpeace.org (fw.nli.gl3 [192.168.31.7]) by bb.nli.gl3 (8.12.8/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k5F8EU7j028064; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:14:30 +0200 Received: from [192.168.200.143] (vpni.greenpeace.org [212.19.215.76]) (authenticated (128 bits)) by maila.greenpeace.org (8.13.4/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k5F8ENmW007804 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128 bits) verified NO); Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:14:27 +0200 Message-ID: <44911706.60204@superlativ.dk> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:15:02 +0200 From: Nis Jorgensen User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kah_hang_ang@toray.com.my CC: "A. Kretschmer" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Is it possible to start two instances of postgresql? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Anti-Virus: Kaspersky Anti-Virus for MailServers 5.5.2/RELEASE, bases: 25072005 #131892, status: clean X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200606/297 X-Sequence-Number: 19654 kah_hang_ang@toray.com.my wrote: > both of the two database are live but use for two different web app. > my company don't want to spend more to buy a new server, so then I think of > to implement both under the same server and one instance.. > but then my superior don't want to do that way. > they want to implement two databases in one server but if one of the > database down it will not affect the other, so that's why I need to have > two instances. We are currently running your suggestion (two instances of PG) in a production server, with no obvious problems attributable to the setup (we have seen some performance problems with one system, but those are likely caused by bad db/application design). In our case the two systems are running different minor versions (although we are planning to migrate them both to the latest 7.4.x). /Nis