From: | bsimon(at)loxane(dot)com |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | NAS, SAN or any alternate solution ? |
Date: | 2004-07-20 07:52:56 |
Message-ID: | OF87F30D92.9973FC60-ONC1256ED7.0029C226-C1256ED7.002B6957@beauchamp.loxane.fr |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi all,
I've been searching the list for a while but couldn't find any up-to-date
information relating to my problem.
We have a production server with postgresql on cygwin that currently deels
with about 200 Gigs of data (1 big IDE drive). We plan to move to linux
for some reasons I don't have to explain.
Our aim is also to be able to increase our storage capacity up to
approximately 1 or 2 terabytes and to speed up our production process. As
we are a small "microsoft addicted" company , we have some difficulties to
choose the best configuration that would best meet our needs.
Our production process is based on transaction (mostly huge inserts) and
disk access is the main bottlle-neck.
Our main concern is hardware related :
Would NAS or SAN be good solutions ? (I've read that NAS uses NFS which
could slow down the transfer rate ??)
Has anyone ever tried one of these with postgresql ?
I would appreciate any comments.
Thanks in advance.
Benjamin.
================================================
Benjamin Simon - Ingénieur Développement Cartographie
http://www.loxane.com
tel : 01 30 40 24 00
Fax : 01 30 40 24 04
LOXANE
271, Chaussée Jules César 95250 Beauchamp
France
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2004-07-20 08:20:56 | Re: NAS, SAN or any alternate solution ? |
Previous Message | Andy Ballingall | 2004-07-19 09:12:12 | Re: Working on huge RAM based datasets |