I think SAN is better for block access instead of file access (NAS)
-----Mensaje original-----
De: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org] En nombre de Bryan Keller
Enviado el: miércoles, 09 de febrero de 2011 05:00 p.m.
Para: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Asunto: [ADMIN] Postgres on NAS/NFS
I am considering running a Postgres with the database hosted on a NAS via
NFS. I have read a few things on the Web saying this is not recommended, as
it will be slow and could potentially cause data corruption.
My goal is to have the database on a shared filesystem so in case of server
failure, I can start up a standby Postgres server and point it to the same
database. I would rather not use a SAN as I have heard horror stories about
managing them. Also they are extremely expensive. A DAS would be another
option, but I'm not sure if a DAS can be connected to two servers for server
failover purposes.
Currently I am considering not using a shared filesystem and instead using
replication between the two servers.
I am wondering what solutions have others used for my active-passive
Postgres failover scenario? Is a NAS still not a recommended approach? Will
a DAS work? Or is replication the best approach?
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org) To make
changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
