Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 152AA9F9A00;
	Sat, 29 Sep 2007 11:24:27 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 67733-09; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 11:24:23 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5
Received: from gmp-eb-mail-1.sun.com (gmp-eb-mail-1.sun.com [192.18.6.21])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF0E99F99FF;
	Sat, 29 Sep 2007 11:24:13 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from fe-emea-09.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-2-fe1.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.10])
	by gmp-eb-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id
	l8TEO3Og029526; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 14:24:11 GMT
Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-09.sun.com by fe-emea-09.sun.com
	(Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007))
	id <0JP400001VIVNK00@fe-emea-09.sun.com>
	(original mail from Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM); Sat,
	29 Sep 2007 15:24:03 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [172.17.173.175] ([63.83.109.195])
	by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built
	Feb 28
	2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JP40093SW00A7F0@fe-emea-09.sun.com>; Sat,
	29 Sep 2007 15:24:03 +0100 (BST)
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 07:23:59 -0700
From: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: PG on NFS may be just a bad idea
In-reply-to: <25517.1191038302@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql-novice@postgresql.org,
	Mija Lee <mija@scharp.org>
Message-id: <46FE5FFF.6070606@sun.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <25517.1191038302@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070723)
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200709/1188
X-Sequence-Number: 108340

Tom Lane wrote:

> 
> If this is what's happening I'd claim it is a kernel bug, but seeing
> that I see it on FC6 and Miya sees it on Solaris 10, it would be a bug
> widespread enough that we'd not be likely to get it killed off soon.
> 

I think my colleague was solving similar issue in JavaDB. IIRC the 
problem is in how NFS works and conclusion was do not use JavaDB (Derby) 
on NFS. I forwarded this issue to our NFS gurus and  I will send updated 
information.

		Zdenek