From: | "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "Szymon Guz *EXTERN*" <mabewlun(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Ireneusz Pluta" <ipluta(at)wp(dot)pl> |
Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: question about readonly instances |
Date: | 2011-05-19 08:30:03 |
Message-ID: | D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C20670CD1C@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Szymon Guz wrote:
>>> I've got a question about quite a strange configuration.
>>> I was asked if we can have one storage, with one data directory where one postgresql
>>> instance writes data, and many other instances read those.
>>> Is that possible without any replication and copying data?
>>
>> Why do they think they need that?
>
> They've got some quite
> nice and huge storage and it would be nice to use it from many different machines running postgreses.
I'm surprised to hear that.
Normally storage is the bottleneck for a database, i.e. you would
not gain performance if more than one database ran against the same storage.
> Another option is Oracle which can do that.
I have not heard that RAC is a performance booster.
It's more like a protection against certain types of hardware failure.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2011-05-19 08:34:28 | Re: 500KB PDF saving into large object , what is the table size? |
Previous Message | Hitoshi Harada | 2011-05-19 08:27:50 | Re: optimizing a cpu-heavy query |