6 ms·
Good thing we support HA as well: https://docs.pgdog.dev/features/load-balancer/ https://docs.pgdog.dev/features/load-balancer/ Load balancer with health check
by levkk 3mo ago
Good thing we support HA as well: https://docs.pgdog.dev/features/load-balancer/ https://docs.pgdog.dev/features/load-balancer/
Load balancer with health checks and failover, works out of the box. :) Battle-tested at this point too, so could be worth a look.
- eikenberry 3mo agoThat's great news! I'll bookmark this in case I'm forced to manage Postgres again.
- MeetingsBrowser 3mo agoWhat do you use instead?
- eikenberry 3mo agoI tend towards using key-value databases as I find them general purpose enough while being much more robust. I'm not married to any one in particular, depends on the requirements.
- doctorpangloss 3mo agoIs a load balancer HA?
- gchamonlive 3mo agoNot by itself if it's naive, but if it's able to assess target health and avoid degraded instances then it becomes a component in HA, the other being integrating an orchestrator for gracious recovery.
- doctorpangloss 3mo agofrom their docs: > PgDog does not detect primary failure and will not call pg_promote(). It is expected that the databases are managed externally by another tool, like Patroni or AWS RDS, which handle replica promotion.
- nikolatt 3mo agoWhy the snark comment? The PgDog project has been around for a while, it's not vibe coded.
- doctorpangloss 3mo agookay, it does appear that the LLM didn't write any of this. i guess the simple answer is that it is not HA.
- znpy 3mo agoNot gp but I didn’t perceive any snark in the comment you are replying to
- dev-ns8 3mo agoCombined with a replication strategy and automated health checks, a load balancer could direct traffic to a healthy instance automatically.
- dotancohen 3mo agoWhat happens when the load balancer fails?
- inigyou 3mo agoHA has to be all the way through, in which case you might not need a load balancer because each client already connects to a separate server. If you do, then you can have one load balancer per client machine.
- r7n 3mo agoI've extensively used Dynamo (internally at Amazon and externally) and even founded a DB startup with it at it's core. Boiling down scalability of Postgres vs Dynamo as it's written in blog is a bit terse. Dynamo scales writes horizontally with the keyspace, forever. Postgres simply can't, and no number of layers between the machines and the developer changes that. Sharding, pooling, Citus are all layered on top of an engine where a given row's writes still land on one primary.
- zamalek 3mo agoDynamo is a fundamentally different DB to Postgres. If your problem fits into the dynamo approach (I'd argue that more problems do), then you should be using it. No all problems fit, though.
- r7n 3mo agoAgreed, my critique was about how the article frames scalability. I've yet to see an OLTP problem that can't live in something like Dynamo. KV can model anything if you put in the work, the question is how much modeling discipline you trade for the scale, and in my experience the up front work is always worth it. Most of the time operational issues are swept under the rug and not consider tech debt. Take for example AuroraDB: the sheer engineering it took to make SQL do scalable OLTP at all tells you how much that flexibility actually costs to keep.
- ah27182 3mo agoUpfront modeling work is always worth it, but that only holds if you actually know your access patterns upfront. Most teams don’t, especially early on.
- jsw 3mo agoCurious how the DB startup with Dynamo at its core went. We use it heavily. The primary tricky thing for us at the moment is aligning pricing with workload value.
- 3mo ago