Anselmo bom dia! Não é custoso monstar um Cluster (Storage caseiro) em PostgreSQL, Está em discussão no forum da PostgreSQL a possíbilidade de usar o NFS (Network file system) ou o NBD (Network Block Device), ambos consistem em "Mapear" a partição de dados do PostgreSQL em uma OUTRA máquina com PostgreSQL a fim de que os as duas máquinas trabalhem com a mesma base de dados.
Carlos Eduardo Smanioto Infra Estrutura - Servidores e Segurança Planae - Tecnologia da Informação Fone/Fax +55 14 3224-3066 Ramal 207 www.planae.com.br ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Andrew Rawnsley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Andrew Hammond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 12:46 AM Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Postgres over Linux NBD or NFS > On Mon, 2004-06-21 at 20:46, Andrew Rawnsley wrote: > > On Jun 21, 2004, at 2:02 PM, Andrew Hammond wrote: > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > We're looking for an alternative to fiber-channel disk arrays for mass > > > storage. One of the ideas that we're exploring would involve having the > > > cluster on an NFS mounted filesystem. Another technology we're looking > > > at is the Linux NBD (Network Block Device). > > > > > > > No idea about NBDs, but its generally accepted that running over NFS > > would significantly > > decrease reliability and performance, i.e. it would be a Bad Move (tm). > > Not sure what you > > think to gain. I sure wouldn't trust NFS with a production database. > > > > What exactly are you trying to gain, avoid, or do? > > I've gotten good performance over NFS using switched 100, then later > gigabit. But I wouldn't trust it for diddly. > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
