Mailing-List: contact couchdb-user-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: couchdb-user@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 74.125.44.153 is neither permitted
 nor denied by domain of ayende@ayende.com)
Message-ID: <27d8d0930811110906q337fefa7l73a95efffbf9edfe@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:06:29 +0200
From: "Ayende Rahien" <ayende@ayende.com>
To: couchdb-user@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Any opinions on an NFS data store?
In-Reply-To: <9FAB5490-B178-49D0-A557-CAAF65668570@aptela.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_111798_18800642.1226423189605"
References: <9FAB5490-B178-49D0-A557-CAAF65668570@aptela.com>

------=_Part_111798_18800642.1226423189605
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Probably a bad idea, a lot of NFS implementation would not respect flush()
in the same way that a disk would.caching at the local level is also going
to cause a whole lot of problem.

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 7:03 PM, Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya <
mahesh@aptela.com> wrote:

> Assuming just one CouchDB server, would having the data store be NFS based
> even work?
> What about multiple servers?  I can definitely see chaos emerging from
> multiple servers building View indexes simultaneously, but what if
> read-access was done with 'update=false'?
> What about writes with multiple servers?
>
> Just wondering if there are any *immediate* gotchas that I should be aware
> of (e.g., NFS - Just Say No :-)  )
>
> cheers
> ---
> Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
> CTO,  Aptela Inc.
> (703.386.1500 x9100)
> http://www.aptela.com
>
>

------=_Part_111798_18800642.1226423189605--