Re: NFS performance tuning
От | Joseph Shraibman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: NFS performance tuning |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3F611921.6090009@selectacast.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: NFS performance tuning (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Joseph Shraibman wrote: > >>Is it considered safe to run postgres over nfs if the sync option is used? > > > No, because NFS is not atomic in its operations. However, a number of > people are running PostgreSQL over NFS to network attached storage > devices, and it seems to run fine --- I just am not sure what will > happen if the network attached storage devices goes down. > From the FAQ at http://nfs.sourceforge.net/ : Clients ensure that data that was written using a safe asynchronous write has been written onto permanent storage using a new operation available in Version 3 called a COMMIT. Servers do not send a response to a COMMIT operation until all data specified in the request has been written to permanent storage. NFS Version 3 clients must protect buffered data that has been written using a safe asynchronous write but not yet committed. If a server reboots before a client has sent an appropriate COMMIT, the server can reply to the eventual COMMIT request in a way that forces the client to resend the original write operation. Version 3 clients use COMMIT operations when flushing safe asynchronous writes to the server during a close(2) or fsync(2) system call, or when encountering memory pressure.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: