This is a discussion on postgresql on NFS.. recommended? not recommended? within the Pgsql Performance forums, part of the PostgreSQL category; --> hi, is it recommended to run a postgresql server on a nfs-share (gigabit-network)? so basically i have a NAS ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| hi, is it recommended to run a postgresql server on a nfs-share (gigabit-network)? so basically i have a NAS + a database-server, and wonder if i should put the database on local hard-drives in the db-server, or on the NAS, and mount it using NFS on the database-server. i haven't investigated the issue much yet (checked the mailing-list-archives, but couldn't find anything definitive.. ), so would like to hear opinions/recommendations? can the NAS solution be faster? how much is usually the NFS-overhead? or is there a consensus on this? saying for example "generally, you should never use NFS with postgresql?" or it depends on some factors? intuitively it seems to me that NFS will be always an extra overhead, but maybe it's an unmeasurably small overhead? thanks, gabor ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match |
| ||||
| On 10/8/07, Gábor Farkas <gabor@nekomancer.net> wrote: > hi, > > is it recommended to run a postgresql server on a nfs-share > (gigabit-network)? so basically i have a NAS + a database-server, > and wonder if i should put the database on local hard-drives in the > db-server, or on the NAS, and mount it using NFS on the database-server. > > i haven't investigated the issue much yet (checked the > mailing-list-archives, but couldn't find anything definitive.. ), so > would like to hear opinions/recommendations? > > can the NAS solution be faster? how much is usually the NFS-overhead? > > or is there a consensus on this? saying for example "generally, you > should never use NFS with postgresql?" or it depends on some factors? > > intuitively it seems to me that NFS will be always an extra overhead, > but maybe it's an unmeasurably small overhead? > > thanks, > gabor > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match > This came up recently on pgsql-hackers. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql...9/msg01182.php. See continuation of the thread here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql...0/msg00017.php - Josh/eggyknap ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate |