On 06/30/2011 08:21 AM, abraao895 wrote:
- The HD of the PC1(master) dead. The WAL file don't have replicated because
it is a asynchronous proccess and suppose that this already didn't have
happened.
- The PC2(slave) doesn't have the last record.
That's exactly how some transaction loss can happen in this situation.
Some software worried about this problem maintains a small transaction
log outside of the database, so that it's possible to reconstruct really
critical information after such a disaster.
In PostgreSQL 9.1, due to be released later this year, synchronous
replication is available on a per-transaction basis. That resolves the
concern you have--important transactions can be confirmed on one of the
slaves as a requirement before they commit.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US g...@2ndquadrant.com Baltimore, MD
Comprehensive and Customized PostgreSQL Training Classes:
http://www.2ndquadrant.us/postgresql-training/
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin