Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Aside from what's said there, I'd note that it's a seriously bad idea
> >> to use a "soft mount" or any arrangement wherein it's possible for
> >> Postgres to be running while the NFS disk is not mounted.
>
> > Do the docs need updating for this?
>
> Wouldn't be a bad idea to mention it, if we're going to have a section
> pointing out NFS risks.
Documentation mention added.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Index: doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml,v
retrieving revision 1.409
diff -c -c -r1.409 runtime.sgml
*** doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml 26 Feb 2008 18:01:26 -0000 1.409
--- doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml 21 Mar 2008 14:23:10 -0000
***************
*** 183,189 ****
Specifically, delayed (asynchronous) writes to the <acronym>NFS</>
server can cause reliability problems; if possible, mount
<acronym>NFS</> file systems synchronously (without caching) to avoid
! this. (Storage Area Networks (<acronym>SAN</>) use a low-level
communication protocol rather than <acronym>NFS</>.)
</para>
--- 183,190 ----
Specifically, delayed (asynchronous) writes to the <acronym>NFS</>
server can cause reliability problems; if possible, mount
<acronym>NFS</> file systems synchronously (without caching) to avoid
! this. Also, soft-mounting <acronym>NFS</> is not recommended.
! (Storage Area Networks (<acronym>SAN</>) use a low-level
communication protocol rather than <acronym>NFS</>.)
</para>
