Re: ZFS vs. UFS
| От | Laszlo Nagy |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: ZFS vs. UFS |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 500EE907.1040801@shopzeus.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: ZFS vs. UFS (Craig James <cjames@emolecules.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: ZFS vs. UFS
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
This is why I use a RAID array of 10 disks. So there is no single point of failure. What else could I do? (Yes, I can make regular backups, but that is not the same. I can still loose data...)> I wonder if UFS has better performance or not. Or can you suggest
> another fs? Just of the PGDATA directory.
Relying on physically moving a disk isn't a good backup/recovery strategy. Disks are the least reliable single component in a modern computer. You should figure out the best file system for your application, and separately figure out a recovery strategy, one that can survive the failure of *any* component in your system, including the disk itself.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: