Received: from makus.postgresql.org (makus.postgresql.org [98.129.198.125])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 757AF6B258B
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 29 Dec 2011 10:34:07 -0400 (AST)
Received: from s1v2.e-lietuva.lt ([82.135.156.154] helo=centos5.e-lietuva.lt)
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <aleksej.trofimov@ruptela.lt>) id 1RgH3S-00045I-0q
	for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 14:34:07 +0000
Received: (qmail 13607 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2011 16:33:46 +0200
Received: from ip-195-14-173-2.bnk.lt (HELO ?192.168.10.129?) (195.14.173.2)
	by s1v2.e-lietuva.lt with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP;
	29 Dec 2011 16:33:46 +0200
Message-ID: <4EFC7A49.6070107@ruptela.lt>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 16:33:45 +0200
From: Aleksej Trofimov <aleksej.trofimov@ruptela.lt>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686;
	rv:8.0) Gecko/20111124 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: sgupta <saurabh.b85@gmail.com>
CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Postgresql Replication Performance
References: <1325151184846-5107278.post@n5.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <1325151184846-5107278.post@n5.nabble.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="------------060209050305010309040907"
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/)
X-Archive-Number: 201112/199
X-Sequence-Number: 45998

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------060209050305010309040907
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 12/29/2011 11:33 AM, sgupta wrote:
> I am doing POC on Posgtresql replication. I am using latest version of
> postgresql i.e. 9.1. There are multiple replication solutions avaliable in
> the market (PGCluster, Pgpool-II, Slony-I). Postgresql also provide in-built
> replication solutions (Streaming replication, Warm Standby and hot standby).
> I am confused which solution is best for the financial application for which
> I am doing POC. The application will write around 160 million records with
> row size of 2.5 KB in database. My questions is for following scenarios
> which replication solution will be suitable:
>
> If I would require replication for backup purpose only
> If I would require to scale the reads
> If I would require High Avaliability and Consistency
> Also It will be very helpful if you can share the perfomance or experience
> with postgresql replication solutions.
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Postgresql-Replication-Performance-tp5107278p5107278.html
> Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

Which replication solution will be suitable depends on your needs and 
database architecture.
Starting with PGCluster, I can say only, that PGCluster last released in 
2005 year, so you can not use it with Postgres 9.0 =)
Slony-I is a good solution if you want to have cascade replication from 
Slave to Slave or you want to replicate only several parts of your 
database (because Slony performs table level like replication)
PGPool-II is an advanced load balancer and pooling solution. Which also 
has replication support. Pgpool-II is query based replication utility, 
which performs queries on several database servers. If you are looking 
for performance and stability I do not recommend using PGPool as 
replication software.
Postgres Streaming replication is WAL based replication, so using this 
type of replication you will have absolutely identical database servers, 
what is best choice for HA and scaling reads. Also this choice is not 
practically affecting performance, because it is not adding any latency 
to database layer.

Also you could read about difference between Slony and Streaming 
replications here 
http://scanningpages.wordpress.com/2010/10/09/9-0-streaming-replication-vs-slony/


-- 
Best regards

Aleksej Trofimov


--------------060209050305010309040907
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    On 12/29/2011 11:33 AM, sgupta wrote:
    <blockquote cite="mid:1325151184846-5107278.post@n5.nabble.com"
      type="cite">
      <pre wrap="">I am doing POC on Posgtresql replication. I am using latest version of
postgresql i.e. 9.1. There are multiple replication solutions avaliable in
the market (PGCluster, Pgpool-II, Slony-I). Postgresql also provide in-built
replication solutions (Streaming replication, Warm Standby and hot standby).
I am confused which solution is best for the financial application for which
I am doing POC. The application will write around 160 million records with
row size of 2.5 KB in database. My questions is for following scenarios
which replication solution will be suitable:

If I would require replication for backup purpose only
If I would require to scale the reads
If I would require High Avaliability and Consistency
Also It will be very helpful if you can share the perfomance or experience
with postgresql replication solutions.

Thanks

--
View this message in context: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Postgresql-Replication-Performance-tp5107278p5107278.html">http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Postgresql-Replication-Performance-tp5107278p5107278.html</a>
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Which replication solution will be suitable depends on your needs
    and database architecture.<br>
    Starting with PGCluster, I can say only, that PGCluster last
    released in <font color="#000000">2005 year, so you can not use it
      with Postgres 9.0 =)<br>
      Slony-I is a good solution if you want to have cascade replication
      from Slave to Slave or you want to replicate only several parts of
      your database (because Slony performs table level like
      replication)<br>
      PGPool-II is an advanced load balancer and pooling solution. Which
      also has replication support. Pgpool-II is query based replication
      utility, which performs queries on several database servers. If
      you are looking for performance and stability I do not recommend
      using PGPool as replication software. <br>
      Postgres Streaming replication is WAL based replication, so using
      this type of replication you will have absolutely identical
      database servers, what is best choice for HA and scaling reads.
      Also this choice is not practically affecting performance, because
      it is not adding any latency to database layer.<br>
      <br>
      Also you could read about difference between Slony and Streaming
      replications here
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://scanningpages.wordpress.com/2010/10/09/9-0-streaming-replication-vs-slony/">http://scanningpages.wordpress.com/2010/10/09/9-0-streaming-replication-vs-slony/</a><br>
      <br>
    </font><br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Best regards

Aleksej Trofimov</pre>
  </body>
</html>

--------------060209050305010309040907--