Re: [ADMIN] PG engine takeover or switch over

2007-08-16 Thread Medi Montaseri
Thank you both for your input...this is indeed the type of analysis I was looking for. Now I have to read and understand them more carefully. At this point I wanted to thank you both and hopefully I can trouble you both with some follow ups in the future. Cheers Medi On 8/16/07, Chander Ganesan <

Re: [ADMIN] PG engine takeover or switch over

2007-08-16 Thread Chander Ganesan
Hannes Dorbath wrote: On 15.08.2007 21:30, Medi Montaseri wrote: I am looking for some suggestions to optimize the following problem/solution. Given two nodes A and B (two computers) in a active-passive mode where A is running PG engine, and B is simply standing by, and a common storage (t

Re: [ADMIN] PG engine takeover or switch over

2007-08-16 Thread Hannes Dorbath
On 15.08.2007 21:30, Medi Montaseri wrote: I am looking for some suggestions to optimize the following problem/solution. Given two nodes A and B (two computers) in a active-passive mode where A is running PG engine, and B is simply standing by, and a common storage (twin tailed) ( or from pg_

[ADMIN] PG engine takeover or switch over

2007-08-15 Thread Medi Montaseri
Hi, I am looking for some suggestions to optimize the following problem/solution. Given two nodes A and B (two computers) in a active-passive mode where A is running PG engine, and B is simply standing by, and a common storage (twin tailed) ( or from pg_ctl point of view -D /common/data ), I a