Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: NAS, SAN or any alternate solution ?

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: bsimon(at)loxane(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: NAS, SAN or any alternate solution ?
Date: 2004-07-20 16:44:42
Message-ID: 40FD4BFA.5010807@joeconway.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
bsimon(at)loxane(dot)com wrote:
> 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 ? 

Not (yet) with Postgres, but my company has run ~100GB Oracle database 
on NAS (NetApp) for the past couple of years. We've found it to 
outperform local attached storage, and it has been extremely reliable 
and flexible. Our DBAs wouldn't give it up without a fight.

Joe

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-07-20 17:02:49
Subject: Re: Odd sorting behaviour
Previous:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2004-07-20 15:28:54
Subject: Re: Réf. : Re: NAS, SAN or any

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group