From: | Jim Montgomery <monty1967(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <wultsch(at)gmail(dot)com>, <david(dot)bear(at)asu(dot)edu> |
Cc: | <silvio(dot)brandani(at)tech(dot)sdb(dot)it>, <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: postgres data permission |
Date: | 2010-07-16 07:30:40 |
Message-ID: | SNT123-W14F1C0E5A92F41D60C220CA7BC0@phx.gbl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Remove me from your email chain please
I will react very badly if I recieve any more emails from you.
> From: wultsch(at)gmail(dot)com
> Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:14:45 -0700
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] postgres data permission
> To: David(dot)Bear(at)asu(dot)edu
> CC: silvio(dot)brandani(at)tech(dot)sdb(dot)it; pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
>
> 2010/7/15 David Bear <David(dot)Bear(at)asu(dot)edu>:
> > this doesn't make sense. why go through the overhead of smb to get to a
> > database cluster over a network connection when pg can already work over
> > tcpip sockets and work much more switfly on a local file system?
> >
>
> Lets say you have to boxes:
> #1: lots of disk but not much ram or cpu.
> #2: lots of ram and cpu but not much disk.
>
> Could it make sense to have box #2 run pg while mounting the fs of box #1?
>
>
> --
> Rob Wultsch
> wultsch(at)gmail(dot)com
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
_________________________________________________________________
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us now
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rob Wultsch | 2010-07-16 08:07:53 | Re: postgres data permission |
Previous Message | Rob Wultsch | 2010-07-16 07:14:45 | Re: postgres data permission |