Re: [ClusterLabs] Is fencing really a must for Postgres failover?

2019-02-13 Thread Maciej S
live with a loss of some data on one branch and recover it from working master). Thanks, Maciej śr., 13 lut 2019 o 13:10 Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais napisał(a): > On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 13:02:30 +0100 > Maciej S wrote: > > > Thank you all for the answers. I can see your point,

Re: [ClusterLabs] Is fencing really a must for Postgres failover?

2019-02-13 Thread Maciej S
mandatory :) Thanks, Maciej pon., 11 lut 2019 o 17:54 Digimer napisał(a): > On 2019-02-11 6:34 a.m., Maciej S wrote: > > I was wondering if anyone can give a plain answer if fencing is really > > needed in case there are no shared resources being used (as far as I > > d

[ClusterLabs] Is fencing really a must for Postgres failover?

2019-02-11 Thread Maciej S
I was wondering if anyone can give a plain answer if fencing is really needed in case there are no shared resources being used (as far as I define shared resource). We want to use PAF or other Postgres (with replicated data files on the local drives) failover agent together with Corosync, Pacemake