On Wednesday 21 February 2007 01:39, Amos Shapira wrote: > On 20/02/07, Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Quoting Amos Shapira, from the post of Tue, 20 Feb: > > > >that was only a temporary solution for RAC untill OCFS came along and > > > > > > "temporary"? Back in '99 Oracle wouldn't have had it any other way. > > > When > > > > we > > > > yes, temporary the way that punched cards were the best thing till > > magnetic media and interactive terminal were perfected. Get with the > > times. > > Ah, that kind of "temporary"... > > > Anyway, now that OCFS is out and about - would it be recommended for > > other > > > > > databases besides Oracle or is it too Oracle-specific? > > > > supposedly it's not Oracle specific, but it has really low I/O for > > anything else you try to do with it. it's more like "raw device you can > > look at and back up via the VFS", and it's useless if you are not > > running a cluster. > > OK, thanks for the explanation. It still sounds like Oracle are trying to > minimize the penalty for going through the file system layer, tough. > > does PostgreSQL even support running two instances of the DB on two > > > separate nodes over GFS?! I don't think it does. that's available only > > from the big guns like OracleDB and DB2 probably. > > So far my searches came to a conclusion that PostgresQL doesn't support > shared disk, at least not out of the box.
What do you mean by shared disk? Maybe this is what looking for: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/manage-ag-tablespaces.html > > > I'm still digging postgresql.org and last time I went to a (large) book > > shop > > > > > I saw an entire section (about 6-7 shelves) about MySQL but not a > > > single book about PostgresQL. > > > > it's a bad bad bad statistics indicator, but I think you may find that > > on amazon.com (not co.au) the situation will be very similar. > > > > and then again, maybe MySQL is enough for the task? > > Maybe. But I generally like PostgresQL's "completeness" and robustness, > especially when compared to MySQL. > > Also from talking to people who use PostgresQL to run a Very Important > Database (TM) it looks like although they were a bit apologetic about speed > compared to MySQL when I asked what should I use, their recommendation was > to use MySQL for more transient data with not many inter-record relations > and PostgresQL for data which requires many relations and has to be relied > on for a long term. > > --Amos -- Regards, Tzahi. -- Tzahi Fadida Blog: http://tzahi.blogsite.org | Home Site: http://tzahi.webhop.info WARNING TO SPAMMERS: see at http://members.lycos.co.uk/my2nis/spamwarning.html ================================================================To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
