X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974469DC9B3 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:58:47 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 93672-02 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:58:42 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com (out4.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB25D9DCD1F for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:58:39 -0400 (AST) Received: from frontend1.internal (mysql-sessions.internal [10.202.2.149]) by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB45ED39FA2 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 14:58:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from web2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.211]) by frontend1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 06 Mar 2006 14:58:39 -0500 Received: by web2.messagingengine.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id 8903CE275; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 14:58:32 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1141675112.28202.255960101@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Sasl-Enc: BBFRs4kYvz3uGnFRnGpPh8kbYzL2HQFzFx0/ZWW20JNl 1141675112 From: "Jeremy Haile" To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME::Lite 5022 (F2.73; T1.15; A1.64; B3.05; Q3.03) References: <20060306131355.A1227@ganymede.hub.org> Subject: Postgres and Ingres R3 / SAN In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 14:58:32 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.21 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.210] X-Spam-Score: 0.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/42 X-Sequence-Number: 17479 Clustering solutions for PostgreSQL are currently pretty limited. Slony could be a good option in the future, but it currently only supports Master-Slave replication (not true clustering) and in my experience is a pain to set up and administer. Bizgres MPP has a lot of promise, especially for data warehouses, but it currently doesn't have the best OLTP database performance. So, I had a couple of questions: 1) I have heard bad things from people on this list regarding SANs - but is there a better alternative for a high performance database cluster? (both for redundancy and performance) I've heard internal storage touted before, but then you have to do something like master-master replication to get horizontal scalability and write performance will suffer. 2) Has anyone on this list had experience using Ingres R3 in a clustered environment? I am considering using Ingres R3's built-in clustering support with a SAN, but am interested to know other people's experiences before we start toying with this possibility. Any experience with the Ingres support from Computer Associates? Good/bad? Jeremy