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 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 loss); >> >> Well then.. forget about NFS :) > > Could you offer any explanation as to why? > >> What about various replication solutions >> like slony, 8.2 warm standby log shipping, mammoth replicator? > > The environments involve two small devices - one with a flash disk > (the NFS server), and a slave which network-boots off that. Hence > these suggestions don't address the problem. (Would all the > alternative protocols listed at the top be able to coexist with the > described environment? Both devices must be able to boot into Linux.) Since you're booting from the NFS server, it would make more sense to have your boot process start a postgresql instance from a copy of the data directory instead of over NFS, no? Certainly, that way, you can have multiple instances booted and running. Do you need to sync back to the NFS server?
The second device has no non-volatile storage. (Sorry I should've explicitly stated this.) Yang
Cheers, M
