| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ish Ahluwalia <ahluwalia(at)erinc(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgSql Memory footprint |
| Date: | 2003-09-17 05:24:53 |
| Message-ID: | 29479.1063776293@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Ish Ahluwalia <ahluwalia(at)erinc(dot)com> writes:
> Thanks for the resply. We're looking to use pgSql in a embedded systems
> environment especially for a telecom switch. Memory may not be that big
> of a issue as we plan to have a reasonable size flash and decent RAM too
> (64 to 128 Mb - which is a lot for embedded systems). The idea here is
> to use the database as a way to store information for all the processes
> that may be running.
You'd probably be happier with something like Berkeley DB. PG isn't
really designed for that sort of thing --- just to start with, you don't
want to point it at flash RAM as "disk" storage, because your flash RAM
life expectancy of ~10000 write cycles won't last long.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-09-17 06:08:47 | Re: Idea for improving speed of pg_restore |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-17 05:19:52 | Re: State of Beta 2 |