Hi,
Thank you for the response. before the posting goes to further discussion. I
realize this for cygwin discussion. You are right when running Postgresql
need to be in native Windows or Linux. So that's why I am choosing
Postgresql 8.0. I already post this issues in diffrent group. that's in
pgsql performances. (just for clarification, I am not running it in cygwin
environment. It just happens I do not not which group to post. And thought
cygwin is for postgresql in windows environment).
Thank you,
Rosny
>From: Reini Urban <rurban@x-ray.at>
>To: SehatRosny <SehatRosny@hotmail.com>
>CC: pgsql-cygwin@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [CYGWIN] Postgres Database Design Issues in Tablespace
>Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 17:34:30 +0100
>
>SehatRosny schrieb:
>>Refering to 20 tables which can be partition A. All departments tables
>>is put into 20 tables.
>> some querying of 20 millions records.
>> B. For each department create tablespace. (Which means, if there
>> are 7000 departments, there will be 7000 tablespace each contains
>> 20 tables). A1. Use A option,
>> As tables become huge. partition the tables which hits often
>> and has large size file(usually when it bigger than 2-3 GB size)
>> into separate tablespace.
>>B1. Use B option,
>> Creating 7000 TableSpace for Departments
>> - One Department has one tablespace
>> - Each Department has 20 tables
>
>>Question :
>> 1. Is it B1 the right approach?
>> 2. Is progresql will have problems if I have 7000 tablespace?
>
>why tablespace at all? do some caclulation, buy a large disc and forget
>about tablespace. (i.e. symlinks)
>
>postgresql-cygwin certainly will have problems which such a configuration.
>Please use a decent operating system and filesystem for such a crazy idea.
>
>cygwin is certainly not suited well for such a production database.
>consider native windows or any unix instead.
>
>NTFS is certainly not suited well for > 500 files per dir.
>consider a unix filesystem instead.
>--
>Reini Urban
>http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/