| From: | Chris Miles <chris_pg002(at)psychofx(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Multiple backends on a single physical database |
| Date: | 2002-10-12 15:19:39 |
| Message-ID: | 20021012161939.K6712@psychofx.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 11:11:53AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Good question. It is my understanding that fsync, locking, and the
> order of writes is not guaranteed in NFS like it is for local file
> systems. I question how well it would handle any of the failure modes
> that local file systems can withstand.
Good point. Perhaps that depends on the NFS client and server combination
also? I know that Netapp worked with Oracle and both companies guarantee
and recommend a Sun/Netapp Oracle over NFS solution (which I have setup
in a previous life) and such a solution works very well.
Nobody is going to make such a guarantee with postgresql (are they?)
so consider us a case study for such a setup. So far, so good, even
under heavy load testing.
If anybody has any horror stories with postgresql over NFS, please share
them.
Cheers,
Chris.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-12 16:26:51 | Re: Multiple backends on a single physical database |
| Previous Message | Chris Miles | 2002-10-12 15:14:13 | Replicating MSSQL to PostgreSQL possible? |