[Pgpool-general] inconsistency when using two pgpool instances in warm standby?

[Marcelo Martins]

I have not checked on pgpool-HA but I'm very inrest in checking that  
out now since the Ucarp solution that I have right now is on a dev  
environment.
Please let us know when that tutorial is live :)

thanks

Marcelo
PostgreSQL DBA
Linux/Solaris System Administrator
http://www.zeroaccess.org

On Dec 15, 2008, at 7:49 AM, Jaume Sabater wrote:

> Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
>>> I'm designing a warm-standby Postgres/pgpool system accepting
>>> connections from a number of application servers.
>>>
>>> Of course, running a single instance of pgpool introduces a single  
>>> point
>>> of failure.
>>
>> To avoid the SPOF, you could use pgpool-HA or whatever Hot/Standby
>> additional software to construct pgpool HA cluster.
>
> This is the type of setup I have running (Heartbeat controlling two  
> resources: service IP and pgpool2). Writing an article about it at  
> the moment, will hopefully be ready in a couple of weeks.
>
> Whether pgpool-II runs on the same machines as PostgreSQL, the same  
> solution applies.
>
>> Yes, I had gotten this kind of questions many times. So I talked to
>> someone who are familiar with networking. Suggestions from him was:
>>
>> 1) use bonding/teaming between pgpool("A" or "B") and switch. This
>>   will virtualy make networking down between them never happen.
>>
>> 2) we don't need to care about networking failure between db servers
>>   and switch since if it goes down, each pgpool instance will do the
>>   same failover anyway.
>>
>> 3) any failure inside switch does not likely cause the scenario you
>>   mentioned.
>
> /agree
>
> -- 
> Jaume Sabater
> http://linuxsilo.net/
>
> "Ubi sapientas ibi libertas"
> _______________________________________________
> Pgpool-general mailing list
> Pgpool-general at pgfoundry.org
> http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general