Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ron Johnson
Subject Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance?
Date
Msg-id 458B4C05.3030204@cox.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance?  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance?
List pgsql-general
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/21/06 18:12, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>> Also if you spec the hardware correctly, you can get up to a total of 16
>>>> cores without any significant cost... just add cpus as needed.
>>>> PostgreSQL 8.1 does extremely well up to 8 cpus (8 cores). 8.2 is said
>>>> to perform better on > 8 cores, but I have not tested it.
>> Sure, but *infinite*?  Or were you exercising hyperbole?
>
> I did say, infinite with the *confines* of the hardware :)

:)

>> 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.

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

Is "common sense" really valid?
For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that
whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins
are mud people.
However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFi0wFS9HxQb37XmcRAoaZAJ9s4msf5+3zfInemHzOObYwV4THSgCgihbj
oV4EcWu9/YtO75po/Bi9rys=
=PmCt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Magiclouds Magicloud"
Date:
Subject: How could I get a win32/aix version of plruby?
Next
From: Michael Glaesemann
Date:
Subject: Re: Directly programmed query plans?