Re: Running on an NFS Mounted Directory - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Michael Stone
Subject Re: Running on an NFS Mounted Directory
Date
Msg-id 20060427124455.GF31328@mathom.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Running on an NFS Mounted Directory  (Ketema Harris <ketema@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Running on an NFS Mounted Directory  (Ketema Harris <ketema@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 08:38:55AM -0400, Ketema Harris wrote:
>I am looking for the best solution to have a large amount of disk storage
>attached to my PostgreSQL 8.1 server.

>What other options/protocols are there to get high performance and data
>integrity while having the benefit of not having the physical storage
>attached to the db server?

These are two distinct requirements. Are both really requirements or is
one "nice to have"? The "best" solution for "a large amount of disk
storage" isn't "not having the physical storage attached to the db
server". If you use non-local storage it will be slower and more
expensive, quite likely by a large margin. There may be other advantages
to doing so, but you haven't mentioned any of those as requirements.

Mike Stone

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Ketema Harris
Date:
Subject: Re: Running on an NFS Mounted Directory
Next
From: Ketema Harris
Date:
Subject: Re: Running on an NFS Mounted Directory