We have gotten very good performance from netapp and postgres 7.4.11 .
I was able to push about 100MB/s over gigE, but that was limited by
DAS will generally always be faster, but if for example you have 2
disks vs. 100 NFS mounted ,NFS will be faster.
NFS is very reliable and I would stay away from iscsi.
On Apr 26, 2006, at 7:35 PM, Steve Wampler wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:06:58PM -0400, Ketema Harris wrote:
>> I was wondering if there were any performance issues with having a
>> directory that was an nfs mounted drive? Say like a SAN or NAS
>> device? Has
>> anyone done this before?
> My understanding is that NFS is pretty poor in performance in general,
> so I would expect it to be particularly bad for a DB. You might run
> some (non-DB) performance tests to get a feel for how bad it might me.
> (Someone once told me that NFS topped out at around 12MB/s, but I
> know if that's really true [they were trying to sell a competitive
> networked filesystem]).
> In any event, you're at least limited by ethernet speeds, if not more.
> Steve Wampler -- swampler(at)noao(dot)edu
> The gods that smiled on your birth are now laughing out loud.
> ---------------------------(end of
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Jim C. Nasby||Date: 2006-04-27 04:55:24|
|Subject: Re: Running on an NFS Mounted Directory|
|Previous:||From: mark||Date: 2006-04-27 02:56:02|
|Subject: Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs|