Scalability
От | Jan Ploski |
---|---|
Тема | Scalability |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5394851.984578049673.JavaMail.jpl@remotejava обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Scalability
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Hello, When large databases, complex queries and frequent access are combined, the database backend may become a performance bottleneck. This is quite obvious. Do I assume correctly that CPU will be the earliest limiting factor for a database (if we have a reasonable amount of memory in the box)? If yes, one could deal with it by switching to a more powerful machine, OR one could distribute the database between several equivalent machines, as I imagine. The latter makes sense if data can be partitioned so that consistency and dependencies can be worked around, that is, I can move two subsets of data (say A and B) to two different boxes if rows in these subsets are very unlikely to be combined in a single query. Then I can have my application code access the correct database instance based on some simple rule, for example, users with IDs 0-1000000 have their messages stored on box A and all others on box B. Or: articles for newsgroups with hash code == 0 -> box A, others -> box B. Do we get linear scalability that way? I guess so. Does it sound cool? Yes. But does it cost less than upgrading a single server? I'm not sure. Is anyone out there using such a load balancing scheme with PostgreSQL? Are there any foreseeable problems which would make it impractical? Thanks - JPL
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: