You can subscribe to this list here.
2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(6) |
Sep
|
Oct
(19) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2011 |
Jan
(12) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
(4) |
May
(32) |
Jun
(12) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(3) |
Nov
|
Dec
(10) |
2012 |
Jan
(11) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(25) |
May
(53) |
Jun
(38) |
Jul
(103) |
Aug
(54) |
Sep
(31) |
Oct
(66) |
Nov
(77) |
Dec
(20) |
2013 |
Jan
(91) |
Feb
(86) |
Mar
(103) |
Apr
(107) |
May
(25) |
Jun
(37) |
Jul
(17) |
Aug
(59) |
Sep
(38) |
Oct
(78) |
Nov
(29) |
Dec
(15) |
2014 |
Jan
(23) |
Feb
(82) |
Mar
(118) |
Apr
(101) |
May
(103) |
Jun
(45) |
Jul
(6) |
Aug
(10) |
Sep
|
Oct
(32) |
Nov
|
Dec
(9) |
2015 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(9) |
Aug
(4) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2016 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2017 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(3) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(4) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
(7) |
6
(2) |
7
|
8
|
9
(5) |
10
|
11
|
12
(5) |
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
(3) |
17
(6) |
18
|
19
(1) |
20
|
21
(1) |
22
(1) |
23
(2) |
24
|
25
(2) |
26
(2) |
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
From: Nikhil S. <ni...@st...> - 2013-09-22 02:01:14
|
Hi Prasad, 1) I am trying to evaluate the High Availability aspects of PGXC; and > notice that GTM, and GTM-standby are configured to be in continuous > sync. That means, every status change in GTM is synchronously made at > GTM-standby. In such setup, what is the performance drop becoz of > gtm-standby. > > Are there any benchmark tests run with and without GTM-standby?? what > are the numbers?? > > We did not see any significant differences in the with and without GTM-Standby numbers when we did the runs some while ago. Don't have more specifics right now though. > 2) How is GTM failure discovered? Vanilla PGXC, doesn't integrate with > clusters like Corosync, right?? > > You can come up with your resource agents for Corosync/Pacemaker. That's what we did at StormDB. We have agents for GTM and datanode failover. > 3) During GTM-failover, I see bunch of manual steps are needed to > promote the GTM-standby to master; and make the GTM-proxies reconnect > to the new GTM. What happens to the in-flight and new transactions > while this GTM-failover happening?? > I guess all active transaction will have to hang during this period, > isn't?? > > Again if you integrate properly with Corosync/Pacemaker or have your own HA infrastructure in place, then you won't need any manual steps. Transactions would fail or error out for a brief period when this is happening. If the application has logic to retry the transactions then it might help. Regards, Nikhils > thanks, > -Prasad > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > LIMITED TIME SALE - Full Year of Microsoft Training For Just $49.99! > 1,500+ hours of tutorials including VisualStudio 2012, Windows 8, > SharePoint > 2013, SQL 2012, MVC 4, more. BEST VALUE: New Multi-Library Power Pack > includes > Mobile, Cloud, Java, and UX Design. Lowest price ever! Ends 9/20/13. > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58041151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Postgres-xc-general mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-general > -- StormDB - http://www.stormdb.com The Database Cloud |