Re: [GENERAL] Large database

From: Rachel Greenham <rachel(at)enlarion(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: Graham Daley <gd(at)pinmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Large database
Date: 1999-08-17 15:45:19
Message-ID: 37B9838F.C38023E8@enlarion.demon.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Graham Daley wrote:
>
> I'm considering using Postgresql for an application which could very likely require a database to grow up to about 1TB in size.
>
> 1. Is this possible with Postresql on Linux?
>
> 2. Is it possible for database tables to span files on more than one disk partition? I'm aware that it splits files into 2GB chunks automatically, but is it possible for these files to reside on more than one partition?
>
> 3. What's the biggest known database currently running on Postgresql?
>
> Thanks for your help!,

I think in all honesty you might be better off with Oracle, probably
under Solaris. If it's that big a project the investment is probably
worthwhile. I hate to say this, as I love Linux and Postgres. Linux can
now apparently handle 1Tb partitions but it's still Experimental, so
while Oracle does now exist for Linux, if it's important I'd say go for
a Solaris solution.

I'd love to be proven wrong on this BTW, but the "use Oracle" advice
does come from a Linux kernel core team member to whom I mentioned this.
(Terribly useful to be living with such a person. :-))

While Linux can run on pretty big iron these days, it doesn't really
scale up to really big systems very elegantly. This is set to change
with 2.4 of course, but right now Linux aint happy going that big.

--
Rachel

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ole Gjerde 1999-08-17 16:02:12 Re: [GENERAL] Large database
Previous Message Hub.Org News Admin 1999-08-17 15:28:05