Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance?
| От | Joshua D. Drake |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 1166766274.5594.91.camel@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance? (Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance?
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
> >> With One Big Database, you can get a SAN and attach a whole lot of
> >> disk space, but your mobo will only accept a certain number of DIMMs
> >> and processors of certain designs. And when your growing mega
> >> database maxes out your h/w, you're stuck.
> >
> > Define mega... Because you would need to be in the multi-terrabyte
> > range.
>
> I'm thinking more of RAM and CPU.
32GB is an awful lot of ram... as is 8 cores. You can get 16 core
machines now that will take 64GB.
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: