[pgpool-general: 3665] Re: postgresql and pgpool - how best to set up a no data loss solution

Derek derek_kouch at yahoo.com.au
Tue Apr 28 16:23:44 JST 2015

I've decided to go with the synchronous connection with 2 standbys. This way if the 1st standby loses connection to the master, the 2nd standby will take over the synchronous connection. That way it doesn't leave the master in a frozen state while waiting for the 1st standby to come back online.

Thanks for your help.

Kind regards,

> On 27 Apr 2015, at 11:32 am, Christophe Pettus <xof at thebuild.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 26, 2015, at 6:28 PM, Derek <derek_kouch at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>> The reason why I don't want to use a synchronous connection is because if the standby is slow, or is down, it freezes the master.
> Then you need to resign yourself to the possibility that you might lose committed transactions in the case of destruction of the master.  To make sure that the secondary is as close as possible to the master, don't direct query traffic to it so that it never has to delay applying changes due to query conflicts.
> --
> -- Christophe Pettus
>   xof at thebuild.com
> _______________________________________________
> pgpool-general mailing list
> pgpool-general at pgpool.net
> http://www.pgpool.net/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general

More information about the pgpool-general mailing list