Would you ever recommend Shared Disk Failover for HA?

Admins,

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/different-replication-solutions.html
is listing a shared disk solution for HA.

It also mentions, "that the standby server should never access the shared storage while the primary server is
running."

In a datacenter, where we have postgresql servers running on vmware VMs, the shared disk configuration sounds like an
appealingsolution: simple configuration, single server at a given time, simple fail-over, fully non-or-nothing write
mechanics,no hazzle with replication_slots during/after failover, etc...
 

But "Attempts to use PostgreSQL in multi-master shared storage configurations will result in extremely severe data
corruption"(https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Shared_Storage).
 



So it seems to me, getting the comfort of a single server solution, which, in a failover, gets replaced by another
singleserver, is paid by getting the low risk of high damage.
 

I know of the provisions of fencing, STONITH, etc. - but in practise, what is a robust solution? 

For example: How can I STONITH a node while having network problems? 
Whithout reaching the host, I cannot shoot it, nor shut it. 
I also cannot wait for it get visible in the network again: another client might have interfered and commited a
transactionupon the retired master server, faster than I can do some fencing/stonith or whatever.
 


Would you share your opinions or practical business experiences on this topic?

Thanks a lot

cheers

Norbert Poellmann

--
Norbert Poellmann EDV-Beratung             email  : np@ibu.de
Severinstrasse 5                           telefon: 089 38469995  
81541 Muenchen, Germany                    telefon: 0179 2133436