I agree on not linking and adding non-SAN disk
dependancy to your DB. I'm trying to understand your FS reasoning. I have never seen XFS run faster than ReiserFS in any
situation (or for that matter beat any FS in performance except JFS). XFS has
some nifty very large file features, but we're talking about 30G and all modern
FSs support >2G files.
My tendancy would be to stay on ext3, since it is
the default RH FS. I would review site preference and the SAN recommended FS and
see if they add any compelling points.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 8:27
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Moving postgres to
I would stop the database, move the
data directory to the new volume using rsync then start up postgresql pointed
at the new data directory.
-With the db
size being as big as, say, 30+GB, how do I move it on the new logical drive?
(stop postgresql, and simply move it over somehow and make a
Providing everything is working correctly you
can then remove the old data directory.
the internal RAID volume is ext3 filesystem. Any recommendations for the
filesystem on the new FC volume? Rieserfs?
7.4.1(RH9), and 7.2.3 (RH8).
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.commandprompt.com
PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL