Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jeff
Subject Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
Date
Msg-id 4C477AFA-6AF2-11D9-9D52-000D9366F0C4@torgo.978.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering  (Hervé Piedvache <herve@elma.fr>)
Responses Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
List pgsql-performance
On Jan 20, 2005, at 9:36 AM, Hervé Piedvache wrote:

> Sorry but I don't agree with this ... Slony is a replication solution
> ... I
> don't need replication ... what will I do when my database will grow
> up to 50
> Gb ... I'll need more than 50 Gb of RAM on each server ???

Slony doesn't use much ram. The mysql clustering product, ndb I believe
it is called, requires all data fit in RAM. (At least, it used to).
What you'll need is disk space.

As for a cluster I think you are thinking of multi-master replication.

You should look into what others have said about trying to partiition
data among several boxes and then join the results together.

Or you could fork over  hundreds of thousands of dollars for Oracle's
RAC.

--
Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com>
http://www.jefftrout.com/
http://www.stuarthamm.net/


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
Next
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering