Thread: High-volume shop uses PostgreSQL
http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=1482975508&fp=16&fpid=0 -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net Jefferson, LA USA LUKE: Is Perl better than Python? YODA: No... no... no. Quicker, easier, more seductive. LUKE: But how will I know why Python is better than Perl? YODA: You will know. When your code you try to read six months from now.
Kewl article. Ron Johnson wrote: >http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=1482975508&fp=16&fpid=0 > > >
On Wednesday 17 September 2003 04:56 pm, Ron Johnson wrote: > http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=1482975508&fp=16&fpid=0 I do not understand what people mean when they differentiate between scaling vertically versus scaling horizontally. Would someone provide a brief explanation? Thanks, Andrew Gould
high: mainframe wide: web server farm On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Andrew L. Gould wrote: > On Wednesday 17 September 2003 04:56 pm, Ron Johnson wrote: > > http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=1482975508&fp=16&fpid=0 > > I do not understand what people mean when they differentiate between scaling > vertically versus scaling horizontally. > > Would someone provide a brief explanation? > > Thanks, > > Andrew Gould > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html >
Ben wrote:
>high: mainframe
>wide: web server farm
>
>
phd: piled higher and deeper
(given to me by a holder of such a degree - no offense intended)
And on this issue, how does Postgres work better on the web server farm
that than other DBMSs?
I thought it actually had achilles heels in that kind of usage?
i.e.
One postmaster
No extents (or whatever thta word is)
Didn't work well with SAN's
Ben wrote:
>high: mainframe
>wide: web server farm
>
>On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Andrew L. Gould wrote:
>
>
>
>>On Wednesday 17 September 2003 04:56 pm, Ron Johnson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=1482975508&fp=16&fpid=0
>>>
>>>
>>I do not understand what people mean when they differentiate between scaling
>>vertically versus scaling horizontally.
>>
>>Would someone provide a brief explanation?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Andrew Gould
>>
>>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>>TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>>
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
>
>
>
On Wednesday 17 September 2003 05:50 pm, Ben wrote: > high: mainframe > wide: web server farm > > On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Andrew L. Gould wrote: Thanks, Andrew Gould
On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 17:50, Ben wrote:
> high: mainframe
> wide: web server farm
These explanations are too limiting.
vertical: large box that can hold lots of CPUs that all the same
instance of the same OS. IBM (mainframe and Power),
Sun, HP (PA-RISC, Alpha) & SGI all offer these systems,
and they cost a lot.
horizontal: distributed systems (SETI@Home is the classic example
or clusters (of the VMS [and Oracle 9i RAC] or Beowulf
variety).
PostgreSQL does not do horizontal scaling at all, since the postmaster
can only run on 1 CPU, but it's good at vertical scaling, since it
can make use of all of the CPUs in a box. (Well, there's sure to
be a point at which there is so much activity that the postmaster
can't handle it all...)
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Andrew L. Gould wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday 17 September 2003 04:56 pm, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=1482975508&fp=16&fpid=0
> >
> > I do not understand what people mean when they differentiate between scaling
> > vertically versus scaling horizontally.
> >
> > Would someone provide a brief explanation?
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net
Jefferson, LA USA
"Fair is where you take your cows to be judged."
Unknown
Ron Johnson wrote: > PostgreSQL does not do horizontal scaling at all, since the postmaster > can only run on 1 CPU, but it's good at vertical scaling, since it > can make use of all of the CPUs in a box. (Well, there's sure to > be a point at which there is so much activity that the postmaster > can't handle it all...) I seen some PCI cards that permits to have a shared memory shared between more boxes, I'd like know how much effort is required to permit postgres to run on two or more machine and have the shared memory shared between the boxes. Regards Gaetano Mendola
> http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=1482975508&fp=16&fpid=0 Stuff for the advocacy page ?? -- Kaare Rasmussen --Linux, spil,-- Tlf: 3816 2582 Kaki Data tshirts, merchandize Fax: 3816 2501 Howitzvej 75 Åben 12.00-18.00 Email: kar@kakidata.dk 2000 Frederiksberg Lørdag 12.00-16.00 Web: www.suse.dk
On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 03:23, Gaetano Mendola wrote: > Ron Johnson wrote: > > PostgreSQL does not do horizontal scaling at all, since the postmaster > > can only run on 1 CPU, but it's good at vertical scaling, since it > > can make use of all of the CPUs in a box. (Well, there's sure to > > be a point at which there is so much activity that the postmaster > > can't handle it all...) > > I seen some PCI cards that permits to have a shared memory shared > between more boxes, I'd like know how much effort is required to permit > postgres to run on two or more machine and have the shared memory shared > between the boxes. HPaq/DEC has a hardware/software product called MemoryChannel, which does that for you. Of course, it only works with Tru64 and OpenVMS. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net Jefferson, LA USA 484,246 sq mi are needed for 6 billion people to live, 4 persons per lot, in lots that are 60'x150'. That is ~ California, Texas and Missouri. Alternatively, France, Spain and The United Kingdom.
Ron Johnson wrote: > On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 03:23, Gaetano Mendola wrote: > >>Ron Johnson wrote: >> >>>PostgreSQL does not do horizontal scaling at all, since the postmaster >>>can only run on 1 CPU, but it's good at vertical scaling, since it >>>can make use of all of the CPUs in a box. (Well, there's sure to >>>be a point at which there is so much activity that the postmaster >>>can't handle it all...) >> >>I seen some PCI cards that permits to have a shared memory shared >>between more boxes, I'd like know how much effort is required to permit >>postgres to run on two or more machine and have the shared memory shared >>between the boxes. > > > HPaq/DEC has a hardware/software product called MemoryChannel, which > does that for you. Of course, it only works with Tru64 and OpenVMS. I knew the existence of this hardware my concern is about made the postmaster aware that another postmaster is running on another machine and that the underlyng shared memory is shared between two/more boxes. Regards Gaetano Mendola
On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 10:14, Gaetano Mendola wrote: > Ron Johnson wrote: > > On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 03:23, Gaetano Mendola wrote: > > > >>Ron Johnson wrote: > >> > >>>PostgreSQL does not do horizontal scaling at all, since the postmaster > >>>can only run on 1 CPU, but it's good at vertical scaling, since it > >>>can make use of all of the CPUs in a box. (Well, there's sure to > >>>be a point at which there is so much activity that the postmaster > >>>can't handle it all...) > >> > >>I seen some PCI cards that permits to have a shared memory shared > >>between more boxes, I'd like know how much effort is required to permit > >>postgres to run on two or more machine and have the shared memory shared > >>between the boxes. > > > > > > HPaq/DEC has a hardware/software product called MemoryChannel, which > > does that for you. Of course, it only works with Tru64 and OpenVMS. > > > I knew the existence of this hardware my concern is about made the > postmaster aware that another postmaster is running on another machine > and that the underlyng shared memory is shared between two/more boxes. You'd need mechanisms to synchronize the systems. Oracle does this in 9i RAC by licensing Compaq/DEC VAXcluster technology for creating and managing lock trees across the network. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net Jefferson, LA USA "Object-oriented programming is an exceptionally bad idea which could only have originated in California." Edsger Dijkstra