On Mar 26, 2007, at 5:19 PM, Yang wrote:
On 3/26/07, A.M. agentm-at-themactionfaction.com |postgresql|
<...> wrote:
On Mar 26, 2007, at 19:29 , Yang wrote:
>
> The environments involve two small devices - one with a flash disk
> (the NFS server), and a slave which network-boots off that. Hen
"Yang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 3/26/07, Hannes Dorbath light-at-theendofthetunnel.de |postgresql|
>>> However, I am primarily concerned with safety/recoverability (on sudden
>>> power loss);
>>
>> Well then.. forget about NFS :)
> Could you offer any explanation as to why?
Basically, t
On 3/26/07, A.M. agentm-at-themactionfaction.com |postgresql|
<...> wrote:
On Mar 26, 2007, at 19:29 , Yang wrote:
> On 3/26/07, Hannes Dorbath light-at-theendofthetunnel.de |postgresql|
> <...> wrote:
>> There is GFS2, OCFS, DRBD, ENBD, iSCSI, AoE and a ton of other
>> technologies. What on ea
On 3/26/07, Hannes Dorbath light-at-theendofthetunnel.de |postgresql|
<...> wrote:
There is GFS2, OCFS, DRBD, ENBD, iSCSI, AoE and a ton of other
technologies. What on earth is the point in trying to use a DBMS over
NFS? :)
In case it's just for the fun of it, maybe consider:
- davfs2
- curlftpf
Yang wrote:
> This has been discussed before (some URLs below), but the threads
> have unfortunately been rather free of (precise) information. I am
> interested in getting PG running over NFS. However, I am primarily
> concerned with safety/recoverability (on sudden power loss); I care
> very, ver
There is GFS2, OCFS, DRBD, ENBD, iSCSI, AoE and a ton of other
technologies. What on earth is the point in trying to use a DBMS over
NFS? :)
In case it's just for the fun of it, maybe consider:
- davfs2
- curlftpfs
However, I am primarily concerned with safety/recoverability (on sudden power
Hi all,
This has been discussed before (some URLs below), but the threads have
unfortunately been rather free of (precise) information. I am
interested in getting PG running over NFS. However, I am primarily
concerned with safety/recoverability (on sudden power loss); I care
very, very little abo
Cott Lang wrote:
The higher-ups are attempting to force me to run Postgres over NFS at
least temporarily.
Despite giving me a queasy feeling and reading quite a bit of messages
advising against it, running Oracle over NFS with a NAS filer doesn't
seem to be unusual. Is there a reason PG would be
On Thu, 2004-08-05 at 07:37, Tom Lane wrote:
> No --- the issues are not with Postgres per se but with the reliability
> of your NFS setup. On top of the not-infinite reliability of disk drive
> hardware you now have to stack risk of failure of the NAS machine itself,
> network problems, and misc
The higher-ups are attempting to force me to run Postgres over NFS at
least temporarily.
Despite giving me a queasy feeling and reading quite a bit of messages
advising against it, running Oracle over NFS with a NAS filer doesn't
seem to be unusual. Is there a reason PG would be more sensitive th
Cott Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The higher-ups are attempting to force me to run Postgres over NFS at
> least temporarily.
> Despite giving me a queasy feeling and reading quite a bit of messages
> advising against it, running Oracle over NFS with a NAS filer doesn't
> seem to be unusual.
11 matches
Mail list logo
