I am looking for the best solution to have a large amount of disk storage attached to my PostgreSQL 8.1 server. I was thinking of having a san or nas attached device be mounted by the pg server over nfs, hence the question about nfs performance. 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? On 4/27/06 12:55 AM, "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 07:35:42PM -0700, Steve Wampler wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:06:58PM -0400, Ketema Harris wrote: >>> I was wondering if there were any performance issues with having a data >>> directory that was an nfs mounted drive? Say like a SAN or NAS device? Has >>> anyone done this before? >> >> My understanding is that NFS is pretty poor in performance in general, >> so I would expect it to be particularly bad for a DB. You might run >> some (non-DB) performance tests to get a feel for how bad it might me. >> (Someone once told me that NFS topped out at around 12MB/s, but I don't >> know if that's really true [they were trying to sell a competitive >> networked filesystem]). >> >> In any event, you're at least limited by ethernet speeds, if not more. > > More importantly, the latency involved will kill commit performance. If > it doesn't then it's likely that fsync isn't being obeyed, which means 0 > data integrity.
