On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Laszlo Nagy <gand...@shopzeus.com> wrote:
> > > I wonder if UFS has better performance or not. Or can you suggest >> > another fs? Just of the PGDATA directory. >> > > Relying on physically moving a disk isn't a good backup/recovery > strategy. Disks are the least reliable single component in a modern > computer. You should figure out the best file system for your application, > and separately figure out a recovery strategy, one that can survive the > failure of *any* component in your system, including the disk itself. > > This is why I use a RAID array of 10 disks. So there is no single point of > failure. What else could I do? (Yes, I can make regular backups, but that > is not the same. I can still loose data...) > Only you can answer that because it depends on your application. If you're operating PayPal, you probably want 24/7 100% reliability. If you're operating a social networking site for teenagers, losing data is probably not a catastrophe. In my experience, most data loss is NOT from equipment failure. It's from software bugs and operator errors. If your recovery plan doesn't cover this, you have a problem. Craig
