On Nov 11, 2010, at 5:21 PM, Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> On 11/11/2010 16:59, Kathey Marsden wrote:
>> On 11/11/2010 11:27 AM, Mike Matrigali wrote:
>> [snip good summary of support limitations]
>>> I did not see anyway that a java program could find out if the
>>> required syncing was being e
On 11/11/2010 16:59, Kathey Marsden wrote:
On 11/11/2010 11:27 AM, Mike Matrigali wrote:
[snip good summary of support limitations]
I did not see anyway that a java program could find out if the
required syncing was being enforced.
Would it be reasonable to request such an API call in some fut
On 11/11/2010 11:27 AM, Mike Matrigali wrote:
[snip good summary of support limitations]
I did not see anyway that a java program could find out if the
required syncing was being enforced.
Would it be reasonable to request such an API call in some future java
version or would it just simply
And for some really ancient history (at least 10 years ago), I believe
this bit of documentation
actually resulted from one of the developers acidently running the set
of tests in their home directory on nfs and getting errors. So at least
at that time it didn't even take a crash to make someth
Kathey Marsden wrote:
I have always told users they have to have their databases on a local
disk to ensure data integrity and that a system crash for an NFS
mounted database could cause fatal corruption, but had a user this
morning take me to task on this and ask me to explain exactly why. I
On 11/11/2010 07:56, Kathey Marsden wrote:
I have always told users they have to have their databases on a local
disk to ensure data integrity and that a system crash for an NFS mounted
database could cause fatal corruption, but had a user this morning take
me to task on this and ask me to explai
You could use NFS mounted read only databases as you can do so with
CD/DVD based media.
The risks with read-write databases on NFS devices is (was) that in
the old days of UDP protocol based NFS client/servers your connection
may easily break. It is not the case anymore with decent operating
syste
I would agree to be safe and able to sleep at night ensure data integration by
not using NFS mounts database is definitely the way to go. However, I remember
there are SAP customers who do that with Oracle. Oracle push the idea to use
NFS
mounts database. I was referring to article like:
http
A "local" database on an NFS mounted disk? I would never consider such a thing.
My experience with NFS mounted resources is that network congestion
can cause all sorts of nasty side effects. Even something as simple as
an unexpectedly slow read or write can cause unanticipated cascading
failure co
I have always told users they have to have their databases on a local
disk to ensure data integrity and that a system crash for an NFS
mounted database could cause fatal corruption, but had a user this
morning take me to task on this and ask me to explain exactly why. I
gave my general respon
10 matches
Mail list logo
