Re: NAS, SAN or any alternate solution ?

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: bsimon(at)loxane(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: NAS, SAN or any alternate solution ?
Date: 2004-07-20 16:44:42
Message-ID: 40FD4BFA.5010807@joeconway.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

bsimon(at)loxane(dot)com wrote:
> Would NAS or SAN be good solutions ? (I've read that NAS uses NFS which
> could slow down the transfer rate ??)

> Has anyone ever tried one of these with postgresql ?

Not (yet) with Postgres, but my company has run ~100GB Oracle database
on NAS (NetApp) for the past couple of years. We've found it to
outperform local attached storage, and it has been extremely reliable
and flexible. Our DBAs wouldn't give it up without a fight.

Joe

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2004-07-20 17:02:49 Re: Odd sorting behaviour
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2004-07-20 15:28:54 Re: Réf. : Re: NAS, SAN or any