Hervé Piedvache wrote:
>
>
> Dealing about the hardware, for the moment we have only a bi-pentium Xeon
> 2.8Ghz with 4 Gb of RAM ... and we saw we had bad performance results ... so
> we are thinking about a new solution with maybe several servers (server
> design may vary from one to other) ... to get a kind of cluster to get better
> performance ...
>
The poor performance may not necessarily be:
i) attributable to the hardware or,
ii) solved by clustering.
I would recommend determining *why* you got the slowdown. A few possible
reasons are:
i) not vacuuming often enough, freespacemap settings too small.
ii) postgresql.conf setting very non optimal.
iii) index and/or data design not optimal for PG.
My suspicions would start at iii).
Other posters have pointed out that 250000000 records in itself is not
necessarily a problem, so this sort of data size is manageable.
regards
Mark
