Thanks. On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 10:22 PM, John R Pierce <pie...@hogranch.com> wrote:
> On 3/4/2015 9:10 PM, AI Rumman wrote: > >> I am working on setting up a new database server with shared disk and >> cluster failover. >> In this environment, only one node will be active at a certain time. >> Underneath, we are planning to have shared storage with CIFS protocol. >> >> As I am newbie with this storag, can anyone please help me with some info >> what are the database issues I can face with this kind of file system >> protocol with Postgresql 9.1 >> >> > why are you building a NEW system with the 2nd oldest release of > postgres? within a year or so, 9.1 will be obsolete and unsupported. > > CIFS will be pretty slow at the sorts of random writes that a database > server does a lot of, and there's all sorts of room for hard-to-diagnose > issues with unsafe write cache buffering in the file server, depending on > the specifics of the CIFS server implementation. Not sure how you > implement a high availability CIFS server without single points of failure, > either... thats hard enough with shared block storage implementations > (requiring redundant storage networks, switches, and dual storage > controllers with shared cache, dual homing the actual physical block > storage, which is dual ported and all raid 10 typically). > > ISCSI or a proper SAN (fiberchannel) would be a much better choice for a > shared storage active/passive cluster, just implement some sort of storage > fencing to ensure only one node can have the file system mounted at a time. > > with postgres, its usually better to implement a HA cluster via streaming > replication, the master and slave each with their own dedicated storage, > and promoting the slave to master if/when the master dies. > > > -- > john r pierce 37N 122W > somewhere on the middle of the left coast > > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general >
