>
> Is this architecture considered a best practice within the PostgreSQL
> community?
I would say Patroni is probably "best practice", but there are other people
out there happy with, and expert with, repmgr as well.
Are there any potential bottlenecks or failure points I should be aware of?
On Mon, 2025-07-21 at 10:47 +, Klaus Darilion wrote:
> (Note: I have also attached the whole email for better readability of the
> logs)
Your mail looks good enough the way it is:
https://postgr.es/m/DBAPR03MB6358854AD71C8ABA5CA10A8DF15DA%40DBAPR03MB6358.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com
> Our setup
(Note: I have also attached the whole email for better readability of the logs)
Hello!
Our setup: 5 Node Patroni Cluster with PostgreSQL 16.9.
db1: current leader
db2: sync-replica
db3/4/5: replica
The replicas connect to the leader using the host IP of the leader. So there
are 4 walsender for
