Re: PostgreSQL Scalable ? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jeff
Subject Re: PostgreSQL Scalable ?
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSF.4.44.0310101253380.78002-100000@torgo.978.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to PostgreSQL Scalable ?  (Hervé Piedvache <herve@elma.fr>)
List pgsql-performance
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, [iso-8859-15] Herv� Piedvache wrote:

> One other small question ... Does PostgreSQL is scalable ?
> I mean ... is it possible to have two servers, one rack of disks connected to
> the 2 servers to get access in same time to the same database ?

No. You need to replicate the DB to another machine to have this work -
and even still, all writes need to go to the 'master' db. Reads can go to
either.

> To be clear I would like to make a system with PostgreSQL able to answer about
> 70 000 000 requests by day (Internet services) ... I'm not sure about the
> server configuration I have to make.
>

Well, 70M requests/day is only about 810 / second - assuming we're talking
about simple selects that is very easy to achieve.

Considering hardware you should look at: multiple cpus, gigs of memory,
and very fast disks. (Raid5 w/battery backed write caches seem to be
popular).

You should also look at how much data this guy will hold, what is the
read/write ratio and all the "normal" things you should do while planning
a db.

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



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: greg@turnstep.com
Date:
Subject: Re: Compare rows
Next
From: johnnnnnn
Date:
Subject: Re: One or more processor ?