| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Herv? Piedvache <herve(at)elma(dot)fr>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering |
| Date: | 2005-01-21 01:32:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20050121013204.GL67721@decibel.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 10:08:47AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Christopher Kings-Lynne (chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au) wrote:
> > PostgreSQL has replication, but not partitioning (which is what you want).
>
> It doesn't have multi-server partitioning.. It's got partitioning
> within a single server (doesn't it? I thought it did, I know it was
> discussed w/ the guy from Cox Communications and I thought he was using
> it :).
No, PostgreSQL doesn't support any kind of partitioning, unless you
write it yourself. I think there's some work being done in this area,
though.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-01-21 01:39:22 | Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-01-21 01:30:40 | Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering |