Re: Re: [HACKERS] 8Ko limitation

On Thu, Jul 20, 2000 at 10:35:41AM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Thursday 20 July 2000, at 10 h 0, the keyboard of Karel Zak
> <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> wrote:
>
> > And what is a "large database"? 1, 5 .. 10Gb? If yes, (IMHO) the PostgreSQL
> > is good choice.
>
> Even on Linux? I'm studying a database project where the raw data is 10 to 20
> Gb (it will be in several tables in the same database). Linux has a limit of 2
> Gb for a file (even on 64-bits machine, if I'm correct). A colleague told me
> to use NetBSD instead, because PostgreSQL on a Linux machine cannot host more
> than 2 Gb per database. Any practical experience? (I'm not interested in "It
> should work".)

Postgres splits large tables into multiple files.

Experience suggests it tends to split at around 1.1G (at least, that's
what it has done on my last project).

FWIW, the 2Gig limit doesn't exist on 64bit linux, AFAIK (at least, not
with a 64-bit happy libc; I can't remember if the patches made it into
the version we use in Debian).

Jules

--
Jules Bean | Any sufficiently advanced
jules(at)debian(dot)org | technology is indistinguishable
jules(at)jellybean(dot)co(dot)uk | from a perl script