From: | Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <asmodai(at)wxs(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Maximum table size |
Date: | 2003-09-09 20:23:28 |
Message-ID: | 20030909202328.GR88340@nexus.ninth-circle.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
-On [20030909 20:32], Bruce Momjian (pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
>I know Tom is concerned because we haven't tested it, but I don't think
>anyone has tested 16TB either, nor our 1600-column limit.
If I had the space free on my SAN right now I'd try it.
The 1600 column limit should be easy to test on every system with some
scripts, no?
>Also, I think people look at these numbers to determine if PostgreSQL
>can handle their data needs 5-10 years down the road.
At work right now I have a bunch of 2-3 TB databases using Oracle 8.
We're expected to be using 60 TB in total storage about 2 years down the
road (right now we're using about 20).
I guess GIS databases and image databases might be the ones who would be
more concerned about these sort of limits in the near term future?
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/
>From morning to night I stayed out of sight / Didn't recognise I'd become
No more than alive I'd barely survive / In a word, overrun...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | ivan | 2003-09-09 20:36:42 | Re: pgsql in shared lib |
Previous Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2003-09-09 19:54:47 | Re: Maximum table size |