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

Re: Postgres over Linux NBD or NFS

From: "Scott Marlowe" <smarlowe(at)qwest(dot)net>
To: "Andrew Rawnsley" <ronz(at)ravensfield(dot)com>
Cc: "Andrew Hammond" <ahammond(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>,pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres over Linux NBD or NFS
Date: 2004-06-22 03:46:45
Message-ID: 1087876005.1187.941.camel@localhost.localdomain (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Mon, 2004-06-21 at 20:46, Andrew Rawnsley wrote:
> On Jun 21, 2004, at 2:02 PM, Andrew Hammond wrote:
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > We're looking for an alternative to fiber-channel disk arrays for mass
> > storage. One of the ideas that we're exploring would involve having the
> > cluster on an NFS mounted filesystem. Another technology we're looking
> > at is the Linux NBD (Network Block Device).
> >
> No idea about NBDs, but its generally accepted that running over NFS 
> would significantly
> decrease reliability and performance, i.e. it would be a Bad Move (tm). 
> Not sure what you
> think to gain. I sure wouldn't trust NFS with a production database.
> What exactly are you trying to gain, avoid, or do?

I've gotten good performance over NFS using switched 100, then later
gigabit.  But I wouldn't trust it for diddly.

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Mischa SandbergDate: 2004-06-22 04:46:44
Subject: Re: Major differences between oracle and postgres performance - what can I do ?
Previous:From: Andrew RawnsleyDate: 2004-06-22 02:46:41
Subject: Re: Postgres over Linux NBD or NFS

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group