| From: | Steve Wampler <swampler(at)noao(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hervé Piedvache <herve(at)elma(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering |
| Date: | 2005-01-20 15:40:04 |
| Message-ID: | 41EFD0D4.8050604@noao.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hervé Piedvache wrote:
> Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 16:23, Dave Cramer a écrit :
>
>>Google uses something called the google filesystem, look it up in
>>google. It is a distributed file system.
>
>
> Yes that's another point I'm working on ... make a cluster of server using
> GFS ... and making PostgreSQL running with it ...
A few years ago I played around with GFS, but not for postgresql.
I don't think it's going to help - logically there's no difference
between putting PG on GFS and putting PG on NFS - in both cases
the filesystem doesn't provide any support for distributing the
task at hand - and a PG database server isn't written to be
distributed across hosts regardless of the distribution of the
data across filesystems.
--
Steve Wampler -- swampler(at)noao(dot)edu
The gods that smiled on your birth are now laughing out loud.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard_D_Levine | 2005-01-20 15:42:27 | Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering |
| Previous Message | Dan Langille | 2005-01-20 15:36:04 | Re: index scan of whole table, can't see why |