| From: | Hannes Dorbath <light(at)theendofthetunnel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jean-Denis Girard <jd(dot)girard(at)sysnux(dot)pf> |
| Subject: | Re: Data on NAS / NFS |
| Date: | 2007-07-30 16:14:12 |
| Message-ID: | 46AE0E54.2040605@theendofthetunnel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 28.07.2007 06:48, Jean-Denis Girard wrote:
> The NAS would be from LaCie, using 4 disks (Raid5 + spare)
> (http://www.lacie.com/fr/products/product.htm?pid=10876), mounted via
> NFS from a Linux server running Postgresql .
Sorry, but that sounds like a sick setup..
1.) RAID 5 is a bad choice for a DBMS, due to implicit reads caused by
parity calculation.
2.) Most cheap NAS (such as this one) have way to high latency for a DBMS.
3.) NFS is nothing you want to have a DBMS running on top.
4.) I don't think this device has battery backed cache.
5.) At least I have bad experiences with Lacie storage devices (Bigger
Disk Extreme)
To sum it up.. I'd say what you get with that setup is a dead slow,
unstable PostgreSQL experience with a good chance of data corruption on
power failure.
--
Regards,
Hannes Dorbath
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-07-30 16:30:01 | Re: Core reported from vaccum function. |
| Previous Message | Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum | 2007-07-30 15:40:19 | Re: European users mailing list |