Le 31/03/2011 09:40, Micka a écrit :
> My idea was, and I didn't test it, it's:
>
> Server 1Server 2
> postgres 9 A postgres9 B
> pgpool A pgpool B
> application A application B
>
> The idea was :
>
> - pgpool A is active, it's doing a streaming rep
My idea was, and I didn't test it, it's:
Server 1Server 2
postgres 9 A postgres9 B
pgpool A pgpool B
application A application B
The idea was :
- pgpool A is active, it's doing a streaming replication with postgres A and
B.
-application A is communi
Hi Sean
On 03/31/2011 02:03 AM, Sean Tegtmeyer wrote:
Therefore pgpool-II does not provide a fail-over solution in the case
that the box running pgpool-II goes down, and it would be up to the
user of pgpool-II to implement a fail-over solution that would start
pgpool-II on another box, corr
Le 31/03/2011 02:03, Sean Tegtmeyer a écrit :
> Hi all,
>In both master-slave mode and replication mode, pgpool-II is only running
> on one box, correct?
If you only run pgpool on one box, yes, correct.
> Therefore pgpool-II does not provide
> a fail-over solution in the case that the box ru
Hi all,
In both master-slave mode and replication mode, pgpool-II is only running
on one box, correct? Therefore pgpool-II does not provide
a fail-over solution in the case that the box running pgpool-II goes down,
and it would be up to the user of pgpool-II to implement
a fail-over solution th
