> I'm not suggesting that it's the place of pgpool to *force* a failover. I > am suggesting that one of the criteria that is likely to be useful is the > inability to connect to the master, and that's something that pgpool, > apparently, detects. It seems unnecessary to use completely different > failure-detection mechanisms for the purpose of failover to those used for > the connection management. > > So all I'm looking for is a way for pgpool to shout if it detects a failure. > That could initiate the investigation of the other criteria required for > failover. It's pretty easy. See main.c:failover_handler() for more details. -- Tatsuo Ishii > > The last thing in the world you need is to fail over to a slave because > > somebody accidently tripped over a network cord. > > In our application, that's *exactly* what we need. We have a database that > receives data in a fairly continuous stream. If the datastream cannot be > written to the database, the database becomes worse than useless quite > rapidly. We need the ability to switchover or failover to another node as > master as soon as possible, to allow the datastream to be written to the > other node. We'll rebuild the "failed" master later, if necessary. But if > the failover doesn't happen promptly, we might as well rebuild the whole > cluster. > > Julian Scarfe > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
