Markus Wanner <mar...@bluegap.ch> writes:
> On 10/08/2010 04:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Actually, #2 seems rather difficult even if you want it. Presumably
>> you'd like to keep that state in reliable storage, so it survives master
>> crashes. But how you gonna commit a change to that state, if you just
>> lost every standby (suppose master's ethernet cable got unplugged)?
> IIUC you seem to assume that the master node keeps its master role. But
> users who value availability a lot certainly want automatic fail-over,
Huh? Surely loss of the slaves shouldn't force a failover. Maybe the
slaves really are all dead.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
