Re: Multiple backends on a single physical database

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Multiple backends on a single physical database
Дата
Msg-id 12601.1034440011@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Multiple backends on a single physical database  (Chris Miles <chris_pg002@psychofx.com>)
Ответы Re: Multiple backends on a single physical database
Список pgsql-admin
Chris Miles <chris_pg002@psychofx.com> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 11:11:53AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Good question.  It is my understanding that fsync, locking, and the
>> order of writes is not guaranteed in NFS like it is for local file
>> systems.  I question how well it would handle any of the failure modes
>> that local file systems can withstand.

AFAIR, we do not use file locking, so the unreliability of NFS locks
doesn't hurt us.  What I'd be concerned about is fsync() and sync()
semantics, namely whether data is down to disk when we think it is.

> Nobody is going to make such a guarantee with postgresql (are they?)
> so consider us a case study for such a setup.  So far, so good, even
> under heavy load testing.

Load testing is not the issue here; crash testing is.  Try pulling the
power plug on your NFS box while the database is under load.  If you
can do that repeatedly and not suffer database corruption, then maybe
you have a safe setup.  Be sure to try the case of NFS crash immediately
after a CHECKPOINT.

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Chris Miles
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Multiple backends on a single physical database
Следующее
От: Ragnar Kjørstad
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Multiple backends on a single physical database