Обсуждение: Looking for database hosting
Hi,
the company I'm doing work for is expecting a 20 times increase in
data and seeks a 10 times increase in performance. Having pushed our
database server to the limit daily for the past few months we have
decided we'd prefer to be database users rather than database server
admins. :-)
Are you or can you recommend a database hosting company that is good
for clients that require more power than what a single database
server can offer?
Cheers
Nik
Nik, you may be underestimating just how much performance can be obtained from a single database server. For example, an IBM p595 server connected to an array of ds8300 storage devices could reasonably be expected to provide several orders of magnitude more performance when compared to commodity hardware. In commodity space (albeit, just barely), a 16 core opteron running (the admittedly yet-to-be-released) FreeBSD 7, and a suitably provisioned SAN should also enormously outperform a beige-box solution, and at a fraction of the cost. If it's performance you care about then the pgsql-performance list (which I have cc'd) is the place to talk about it.
I realize this doesn't address your desire to get out of database server administration. I am not aware of any company which provides database hosting, further I'm not entirely convinced that's a viable business solution. The technical issues (security, latency and reliability are the ones that immediately come to mind) associated with a hosted database server solution suggest to me that this would not be economically viable. The business issues around out-sourcing a critical, if not central component of your architecture seem, at least to me, to be insurmountable.
Andrew
I realize this doesn't address your desire to get out of database server administration. I am not aware of any company which provides database hosting, further I'm not entirely convinced that's a viable business solution. The technical issues (security, latency and reliability are the ones that immediately come to mind) associated with a hosted database server solution suggest to me that this would not be economically viable. The business issues around out-sourcing a critical, if not central component of your architecture seem, at least to me, to be insurmountable.
Andrew
On 8/19/07, Niklas Saers <niklassaers@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
the company I'm doing work for is expecting a 20 times increase in
data and seeks a 10 times increase in performance. Having pushed our
database server to the limit daily for the past few months we have
decided we'd prefer to be database users rather than database server
admins. :-)
Are you or can you recommend a database hosting company that is good
for clients that require more power than what a single database
server can offer?
Cheers
Nik
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
Hello,
Just to note something interesting on database scalability: i'm not sure whether your database is used for processing or just data lookup, but if it's used for data lookup, look into memcached -- it's a really scalable caching system which can reduce your database load a lot.
I know a lot of large websites (slashdot, livejournal, etc) use this solution -- they have dozens of gigabytes worth of memcached processes to reduce the cache hits (I'm told livejournal has around 200 of those servers running, making sure around 99.99% of the database queries are just cache hits). This probably has been discussed on this list before, but just in case: look into it.
Regards,
Leon Mergen
--
Leon Mergen
http://www.solatis.com
Just to note something interesting on database scalability: i'm not sure whether your database is used for processing or just data lookup, but if it's used for data lookup, look into memcached -- it's a really scalable caching system which can reduce your database load a lot.
I know a lot of large websites (slashdot, livejournal, etc) use this solution -- they have dozens of gigabytes worth of memcached processes to reduce the cache hits (I'm told livejournal has around 200 of those servers running, making sure around 99.99% of the database queries are just cache hits). This probably has been discussed on this list before, but just in case: look into it.
Regards,
Leon Mergen
On 8/19/07, Andrew Hammond <andrew.george.hammond@gmail.com> wrote:
Nik, you may be underestimating just how much performance can be obtained from a single database server. For example, an IBM p595 server connected to an array of ds8300 storage devices could reasonably be expected to provide several orders of magnitude more performance when compared to commodity hardware. In commodity space (albeit, just barely), a 16 core opteron running (the admittedly yet-to-be-released) FreeBSD 7, and a suitably provisioned SAN should also enormously outperform a beige-box solution, and at a fraction of the cost. If it's performance you care about then the pgsql-performance list (which I have cc'd) is the place to talk about it.
I realize this doesn't address your desire to get out of database server administration. I am not aware of any company which provides database hosting, further I'm not entirely convinced that's a viable business solution. The technical issues (security, latency and reliability are the ones that immediately come to mind) associated with a hosted database server solution suggest to me that this would not be economically viable. The business issues around out-sourcing a critical, if not central component of your architecture seem, at least to me, to be insurmountable.
AndrewOn 8/19/07, Niklas Saers < niklassaers@gmail.com> wrote:Hi,
the company I'm doing work for is expecting a 20 times increase in
data and seeks a 10 times increase in performance. Having pushed our
database server to the limit daily for the past few months we have
decided we'd prefer to be database users rather than database server
admins. :-)
Are you or can you recommend a database hosting company that is good
for clients that require more power than what a single database
server can offer?
Cheers
Nik
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
--
Leon Mergen
http://www.solatis.com