Re: store different tables in different locations - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From Julius Tuskenis
Subject Re: store different tables in different locations
Date
Msg-id 47F5E12B.70701@nsoft.lt
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: store different tables in different locations  ("Duan Ligong" <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>)
Responses Re: store different tables in different locations
List pgsql-admin
> we use postgresql to store  so little data as only 600MB or so, while
> for this,
> we have to do  consume some efforts on managing and maintaining the
> database.  I am not sure whether it is a good and wise design.
> Is there any more wiser design for this case?
In my case postgresql is like "fire and forget". Once installed it needs
to be vacuumed regularly. Thats all. Well, backups also. What
maintenance do you do?

> For some reason the size of database is asked to restrict to 900MB.
> So I have to make efforts to make sure that its size is less than 900MB.
> Maybe I should not do it. :)
It depends on how much data you want to store. You said you have 400
machines in the network, so 900Mb limits you to ~2Mb per machine. You
decide if thats enough.


pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Bräutigam
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres and SUN
Next
From: Marc Cousin
Date:
Subject: cannot restore a view after a dump