Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL, NetBSD and NFS
To: None <>
From: Chuck Yerkes <>
List: current-users
Date: 01/31/2003 14:36:05
Quoting D'Arcy J.M. Cain (
> On Thursday 30 January 2003 16:20, Chuck Yerkes wrote:
> > Yeah, I have enough fears running Databases on non-raw devices,
> > let alone over a network - everything I want a databse for
> > is compromised by having the data files on a network device.
> > Speed (100base T gets you maybe 10MB/s throughput with nothing
> > else there), NFS adds overhead, buffering (non device commits),
> > locking issues and so forth.
> Interesting.  I would sure like some other opinions on that.  The reason for 
> going with the NetApp is to use their snapmirror feature in order to copy a 
> live database at an instant in time.  Using something like rsync fails 
> sometimes because the database could change enough during the sync that it 
> can't recover enough to start.

I've long backed up large databases by mirroring then breaking
the mirror.

Or you kick it into log-only mode, copy the data and then play out
the logs.

I really really *do* like NetApps.  Really.  But NFS is not
the answer to every problem.

I like my table saw too, but it sucks at making small holes.