Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96A6C2E0062 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:33:37 -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 86069-01-3 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:33:28 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from smtp-vbr12.xs4all.nl (smtp-vbr12.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.32]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 060A62E0042 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:33:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: from easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl (easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl [80.126.125.147]) by smtp-vbr12.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m2PDXPJp065614 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:33:26 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from jurgen@easyflex.nl) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3793F46094A for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:33:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pluto.easyflex.lan [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18944-06 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:33:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.1.4.158] (unknown [10.1.4.158]) by easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 428BD460949 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:33:23 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <47E8FF23.2010905@easyflex.nl> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:33:23 +0100 From: Jurgen Haan User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227) MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: PGSQL Performance Subject: Re: PostgreSQL NetApp and NFS References: <1d219a6f0803201232g54924fb3ka206c9b03e4664c7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1d219a6f0803201232g54924fb3ka206c9b03e4664c7@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.904 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL=-1.809, MISSING_HEADERS=1.581, URIBL_OB_SURBL=2.132 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200803/475 X-Sequence-Number: 29429 Well, we're not running PGSQL on a Netapp over NFS, but a DB2 Database. But nevertheless, it runs quite well. NFS is not a bad choice for your database, the big memory buffer that allocates the raid6 blocks makes it all very quick, like you're working directly on a 1+ TB ramdisk. One important thing to keep in mind, is to make sure the NFS protocol used is at least V3 and to check your locking options. This made our DB2 crash, because when configured wrong, the file locking mechanism on an NFS mount behaves differently than that of the local storage. These parameters can be forced from the client side (fstab). But still, with our 100+ GB OLTP database, I'm still quite fond of our netapp. -R- Chris Hoover wrote: > I just found out that my company is planning on migrating my databases > from our current ISCSI storage solution to NetApps connected via NFS. I > knew about the NetApp migration, but always assumed (and shame on me) > that I would have direct attachments to the servers. > > Chris > -- > Come see how to SAVE money on fuel, decrease harmful emissions, and even > make MONEY. Visit http://colafuelguy.mybpi.com and join the revolution! -- Easyflex diensten b.v. Acaciastraat 16 4921 MA MADE T: 0162 - 690410 F: 0162 - 690419 E: info@easyflex.nl W: http://www.easyflex.nl