> We are looking to create a two-machine high-availability configuration > for PostgreSQL. We have been pursuing using something like rserv, but > this appears to be more of a slave sync tool. Actually, this is also > important to us (as we expect we will need to scale to lots of readers > doing queries on the database (we are running datamart of website > performance metrics). > > But, rserv (and eRServer, its commercial cousin) dont seem to have a > hot-standby capability at the moment. I have looked through some of the > PostgreSQL archives and I've seen articles about other approaches, but I > mostly see replication engines (which are a good thing, but not what I > am hunting for). > > I saw one posting that suggested using a clustered filesystem; is this > an option? Has anyone done postgreSQL on a replicating/clustered file > system with decent performance? Any and all ideas are welcome.
We are selling Lifekeeper (a hot-standby cluster software) + PostgreSQL adapter software for Lifekeeper + support combo package called "PostgreSQL HA package" in Japan. This requires an expensive shared disk hardware though. -- Tatsuo Ishii ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
