Well, we're not running PGSQL on a Netapp over NFS, but a DB2 Database.
But nevertheless, it runs quite well. NFS is not a bad choice for your
database, the big memory buffer that allocates the raid6 blocks makes it
all very quick, like you're working directly on a 1+ TB ramdisk.
One important thing to keep in mind, is to make sure the NFS protocol
used is at least V3 and to check your locking options.
This made our DB2 crash, because when configured wrong, the file locking
mechanism on an NFS mount behaves differently than that of the local
storage. These parameters can be forced from the client side (fstab).
But still, with our 100+ GB OLTP database, I'm still quite fond of our
Chris Hoover wrote:
> I just found out that my company is planning on migrating my databases
> from our current ISCSI storage solution to NetApps connected via NFS. I
> knew about the NetApp migration, but always assumed (and shame on me)
> that I would have direct attachments to the servers.
> Come see how to SAVE money on fuel, decrease harmful emissions, and even
> make MONEY. Visit http://colafuelguy.mybpi.com and join the revolution!
Easyflex diensten b.v.
4921 MA MADE
T: 0162 - 690410
F: 0162 - 690419
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Bill Moran||Date: 2008-03-25 13:34:40|
|Subject: Re: what is the maximum number of rows in a table in
|Previous:||From: sathiya psql||Date: 2008-03-25 13:27:12|
|Subject: Re: postgresql is slow with larger table even it is in RAM|