[Pgpool-general] Two geographic instances

[Daniel.Crespo at l-3com.com]

I suggest you to read this:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/interactive/different-replication-sol
utions.html

 

I would look at what Bucardo offers, which is asynchronous multi-master
replication. In synchronous multi-master, and especially in your case
with pgpool-II, if one database goes down, you might end with
inconsistent data in each database (some data same, but newly added data
on each end would cause a conflic in case you wanted to merge somehow
the changes).

 

-Daniel

 

From: pgpool-general-bounces at pgfoundry.org
[mailto:pgpool-general-bounces at pgfoundry.org] On Behalf Of Marco
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 7:04 AM
To: pgpool-general at pgfoundry.org
Subject: [Pgpool-general] Two geographic instances

 

Hi all,

I've been tasked with setting up a website running at two different
geographic locations. Both locations should look the same to users, so
the problem is keeping the database (postgres) consistent. I'm expecting
a minority of the accesses to be writes, and the rest reads.

So I thought about doing something like this: have a postgres database
at each site. On top of that, a pgpool instance at each site configured
to use the local postgres and the remote pgpool as backends. Writes
would go to the local postgres, and to the remote pgpool (synchronously;
I can probably afford the cost as writes will be few).

Would this work technically? Would this provide consistency between the
two databases?

I've never used pgpool before, so I may be uttering nonsense (let me
know if that's the case). Thanks for any help.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://pgfoundry.org/pipermail/pgpool-general/attachments/20101022/01e8bbd6/attachment.html>