From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tomasz Ostrowski <tometzky(at)batory(dot)org(dot)pl> |
Cc: | J Ottery <jottery(at)becsystems(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgres on shared network drive |
Date: | 2008-04-11 07:59:42 |
Message-ID: | 20080411095942.57e5c376@mha-laptop |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tomasz Ostrowski wrote:
> On 2008-04-11 08:53, J Ottery wrote:
>
> > I install PostgreSQL on a client PC and put the data files on a
> > networked drive (instead of the local drive). Postgres as user and
> > localport. This works well.
>
> This is not the way it is meant to work, and it can eat your data.
Change that to it *will* eat your data.
This is absolutely not supported. If it works, it's pure luck and very
temporary...
> > Now I install postgresSQL on another client machine and point it to
> > the same data directory on the network drive.
>
> Wrong. You have to install PostgreSQL on one computer, with data
> directory on local hard drive, and allow many client computers to
> connect to it.
Correct, that's how you do it.
If you for some reason need to run the server locally on each machine,
you need to still have the data directory locally, and set up
replication (with Slony for example) between the nodes. But I don't
think that's what you want.
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gong | 2008-04-11 08:39:19 | Re: how to use transaction isolation |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2008-04-11 07:51:25 | Re: Postgres on shared network drive |