Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > In summary it's an expected behavior. You saw that when second node > went down, the session was not disconncted is a bug with 2.1. In the > CVS head you will see the same behavior regardless which node goes > down. > > The reason for this change was explained in the following thread: > http://lists.pgfoundry.org/pipermail/pgpool-general/2008-July/001119.html
Aha, it makes sense. So the desired and expected behaviour is the one I am having when the slave node fails (query becoming the way pgpool-II realises a node is down, doing failover of that node, and executing the actual query on the rest of nodes). Correct? When do you think that version 2.2 of pgpool-II will be released? Not that I cannot do a checkout of the source code, but I have always preferred to use stable versions as it helps knowing which exact version someone is using compared to the one next to him, so to speak, and when writing articles :) Thanks for your help, Tatsuo. -- Jaume Sabater http://linuxsilo.net/ "Ubi sapientas ibi libertas" _______________________________________________ Pgpool-general mailing list [email protected] http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general
