Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC6811337B6E
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Wed,  9 Feb 2011 15:59:47 -0400 (AST)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 41189-05 for
	<pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Wed,  9 Feb 2011 19:59:40 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-vw0-f46.google.com (mail-vw0-f46.google.com
	[209.85.212.46])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 958CC133616B
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Wed,  9 Feb 2011 15:59:39 -0400 (AST)
Received: by vws16 with SMTP id 16so348192vws.19
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 11:59:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding
	:subject:date:message-id:to:mime-version:x-mailer;
	bh=SFD1cZcSjfLKRv9q1ZgviAmhm4YDwO5avlADVL3A9Ww=;
	b=O7Uq1p+uamgNku92WSebepnCd1LW8seczEmJMvStekQq7hZrAM220SLFdiD1y7P0G2
	20jAwWIyG68M2HI98Sd6EtBOKELZVqtYCifKiJN4Tyf4vefwCN/v9o+qJC976m2FCOHC
	ArveFnNz1kwgtaPAI8bTe6yPVwXx8qf9eq0uk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:message-id
	:to:mime-version:x-mailer;
	b=sb1+N/VqPpUAp6NWaM7AYu/2U7ZV3AuwiF6EPxempY/Jr/mSW6v+QDHhtLqMuTv32R
	OcN6CmDPdx59LitZRO4it+NH3BZvphluej+lwetPxyzaQKnJEh8Dd+Lpix/VxKNOLo8q
	RhfwKkQFLachXxAWfGgylczS/+dMVgwXaRVBU=
Received: by 10.220.177.68 with SMTP id bh4mr5453056vcb.63.1297281578914;
	Wed, 09 Feb 2011 11:59:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.41.41.88] ([216.55.28.254])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bq5sm236725vcb.32.2011.02.09.11.59.36
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
	Wed, 09 Feb 2011 11:59:37 -0800 (PST)
From: Bryan Keller <bryanck@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Postgres on NAS/NFS
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 11:59:35 -0800
Message-Id: <9424C7B4-672D-4C64-BE6A-699708981C0B@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.589 tagged_above=-10 required=5
	tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7,
	T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL=0.01
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 201102/57
X-Sequence-Number: 36696

I am considering running a Postgres with the database hosted on a NAS =
via NFS. I have read a few things on the Web saying this is not =
recommended, as it will be slow and could potentially cause data =
corruption.

My goal is to have the database on a shared filesystem so in case of =
server failure, I can start up a standby Postgres server and point it to =
the same database. I would rather not use a SAN as I have heard horror =
stories about managing them. Also they are extremely expensive. A DAS =
would be another option, but I'm not sure if a DAS can be connected to =
two servers for server failover purposes.

Currently I am considering not using a shared filesystem and instead =
using replication between the two servers.

I am wondering what solutions have others used for my active-passive =
Postgres failover scenario? Is a NAS still not a recommended approach? =
Will a DAS work? Or is replication the best approach?