| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> |
| Cc: | mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, current-users(at)netbsd(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL, NetBSD and NFS |
| Date: | 2003-01-30 21:02:17 |
| Message-ID: | 29258.1043960537@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> writes:
> That was going to be my question too.
> I thought NFS didn't have some of the requisite file system behaviors
> (locking, flushing, etc. IIRC) for PostgreSQL to function correctly or
> reliably.
Whether the thing is trustworthy is a different issue ;-). I was just
surprised that it didn't seem to work at all.
In practice, if the NFS server never goes down then you probably haven't
got a problem. I'm not sure you could count on the database not getting
scrambled if the NFS server crashes. But that wasn't the question...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-30 21:12:21 | Re: Windows Build System - My final thoughts |
| Previous Message | Vince Vielhaber | 2003-01-30 21:01:22 | Re: Windows Build System - My final thoughts |