Re: DAFS?

Vincent, did you actually READ my post before writing yours?

I said quite clearly that the device would be MOUNTED.  I.e. it would have 
a file system on it.

My point being that if you remote mount it as a block device, then the 
file system on the local machine caches (i.e. fast access) while the 
remote machine provides (semi-)fast block access across the network.

diversity is a good thing.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Vincent Janelle wrote:

> *shrugs*, I use shared attached storage.  Routing this stuff through
> nscd (which is what most of those user-space apps do) would be silly.
> 
> You'd still need a filesystem on top of it for postgres, which negates
> the whole issue.  You'd might was well just use a SAN then.  Netapp
> announced that they're adding an option for this, the original poster
> might want to look into that.
> 
> On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:15:01 -0700 (MST)
> "scott.marlowe"  wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Vincent Janelle wrote:
> > 
> > > On 30 Oct 2002 08:47:18 -0500
> > > Doug McNaught  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Graeme Hinchliffe  writes:
> > > > 
> > > > > but dafs isn't nfs.  we were trialing netapp for storage but are
> > > > > going back to local disks as the db ran VERY slowly in
> > > > > comparison. dafs should accelerate things from what i have read.
> > > > 
> > > > If it presents a POSIX filesystem API then PG should work OK with
> > > > it.
> > > > 
> > > > -Doug
> > >  
> > > Doesn't appear to.  A quick scan of the SDK docs appears as though
> > > as if its a direct implementation to access the storage of a device
> > > supporting it by applications, such as database servers over a
> > > network.. Kinda like raw devices.
> > 
> > Look and see if there's some code out there for your OS (Linux???) to 
> > mount a remote network device like this in loop back mode.
> > 
> > Then you might be able to let the OS turn it into a file system for
> > the database, which would get you caching on the database server box
> > at the file system level, but block access across the network for
> > speed.
> > 
> > Then test it as thouroughly as an Apollo mission. :-)