Re: PG over NFS

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Yang" <jkfe7q002(at)sneakemail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG over NFS
Date: 2007-03-27 01:33:03
Message-ID: 9508.1174959183@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"Yang" <jkfe7q002(at)sneakemail(dot)com> writes:
> On 3/26/07, Hannes Dorbath light-at-theendofthetunnel.de |postgresql|
>>> However, I am primarily concerned with safety/recoverability (on sudden power loss);
>>
>> Well then.. forget about NFS :)

> Could you offer any explanation as to why?

Basically, the problem with NFS is that it adds new failure modes that
are not present for local storage. Sure, if all works according to
spec then it's fine, but you're concerned about things going wrong no?

One of the nastier problems that we've seen involved an NFS-mounted DB
where the mount didn't come up till after the postmaster started.
(Searching in the PG archives should uncover that horror story among
others.) You can prevent some problems by being sure to mount the NFS
server hard not soft, but that's far from being a panacea.

AFAIK these issues are not PG-specific in the slightest, but are a
hazard for any DBMS run atop NFS.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Atkins 2007-03-27 02:14:17 Re: PG over NFS
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-03-27 01:25:42 Re: Insert fail: could not open relation with OID 3221204992