[pgpool-general: 4588] Re: Synchronous Streaming replication

[Jose Baez]

*"your data must be in two servers at least"*

Hmmm... I didn't get that point of view. It sounds reasonable. :))

Thank you!


On 29 March 2016 at 18:30, Lucas Luengas <lucasluengas at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello.
>
> I think that is not possible. I think you can read data from master node,
> but you can't update, insert, delete data.
>
> You can try to configure multiple standby servers in
> "synchronous_standby_names".
> The documentations says:
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/runtime-config-replication.html
>
> ... If the current synchronous standby disconnects for whatever reason, it
> will be replaced immediately with the next-highest-priority standby.
> Specifying more than one standby name can allow very high availability.
>
> I think if you use synchronous replication is you need your data must be
> in two servers at least.
>
> Regards.
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Jose Baez <pepote at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi, everyone!
>>
>> In a synchronous Streaming replication (activating "
>> *synchronous_standby_names*" in PostgreSQL 9.4 or higher)  is there any
>> solution/workaround to handle a standby server disconnection and keep
>> working with the master node?
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pgpool-general mailing list
>> pgpool-general at pgpool.net
>> http://www.pgpool.net/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.sraoss.jp/pipermail/pgpool-general/attachments/20160329/6f997586/attachment.html>