[pgpool-general: 6666] Re: active/active with Consul service
ptim007 at yahoo.com
Fri Aug 9 04:52:46 JST 2019
I don't understand the set-up you propose
Are you going to use pgpool to automate the failover of postgres ? If this is the case you cannot have pgpool in an active/active configuration, otherwise both pgpool would initiate the failover of postgres
Also don't you need 3 nodes anyway, to make a consul cluster ?
On Thursday, August 8, 2019, 09:30:07 PM GMT+2, Matthew Tice <mjtice at gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,I have a two node pgpool setup running v.4.0.5 on CentOS 7. I'm using a Consul (consul.io) service health check to create a pgpool service. Going down this road I'm able to have two pgpool nodes available for use:
e.g. host pgpool.service.consul
pgpool.service.consul has address 10.20.6.23
pgpool.service.consul has address 10.20.6.24
My question is, is this a bad idea? I figure that once a connection to pgpool is made by an application it's "pinned" to that node - meaning unless the application disconnects and reconnects it will be connected to that same host indefinitely.
Unless I'm missing something where client metadata is written to pgpool, I can't see a downside to this (which is why I'm asking for clarification/opinions). I was going to go down the watchdog road but in reading the documentation I need 3+ nodes, not just the two I have available.
pgpool-general mailing list
pgpool-general at pgpool.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the pgpool-general