| From: | "Steve Wolfe" <steve(at)iboats(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL over NFS? |
| Date: | 2001-02-09 23:27:04 |
| Message-ID: | 00a501c092ef$d0915b80$50824e40@iboats.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> It is not performance I would be concerned about, but reliability. NFS
> has no state for reliability. I have to ask why they are using NFS
> rather than putting it on a drive local to the machine. If they say
> they want to share the data between two machines, that is even crazier.
They may want to put the data on a file server, so that it gets backed up,
and has the advantage of a hardware fault-tolerant RAID array. Tht has it's
merits, but I don't think it woul dbe that great for performance. We spent
the money to put another RAID array in the database machine, both for
reliability and speed. Once per night, the DB is dumped, and the dump is
copied to the file server, so that we have a second copy somewhere, and it's
included in the nightly tape backup.
steve
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-02-09 23:30:07 | Re: PostgreSQL over NFS? |
| Previous Message | Alfred Perlstein | 2001-02-09 23:23:08 | Re: PostgreSQL over NFS? |