On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 03:44:36PM -0700, Brion Vibber wrote:
On Tuesday, Oct 21, 2003, at 15:39 US/Pacific, Jens
Frank wrote:
The images could also be saved to a filesystem
served by the new db box
(what's its name anyway?). FS access, even remote, should always be
faster
than a db access.
Setting up an NFS share is an extra maintenance and security concern,
moreso if we want to worry about failover when the main db box tanks.
Just things to consider...
AFS should neither pose security concerns nor failover probs, can be
made to replicate its data. Other FS's with similar features are
available.
Regards,
JeLuF