On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 17:11, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > I wouldn't totally discount using NFS for large databases. Believe it or
> > not, with an Oracle database and a Network Appliance for storage, NFS is
> > exactly what is used. We've found that we get better performance with a
> > (properly tuned) NFS mounted NetApp volume than with attached storage on
> > our HPUX box with several 100+GB databases.
>
> We've also tended to keep logs local on raid 1 and the data on a pair of
> custered netapps for PostgreSQL.
But large file support is not really an issue for the database itself,
since table files are split at 1Gb. Unless that changes, the database
is not a problem.
--
Oliver Elphick Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight, UK
http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
========================================
"Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be
accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall
come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man."
Luke 21:36
