From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Postgresql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Maximum table size |
Date: | 2003-09-09 20:57:31 |
Message-ID: | 3F5E3EBB.7040207@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
>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?
>
>
>
They must be very big images or there must be an awful lot of them :-)
Here's a recent sizing done on our image database project:
"60,000 images, thumbnails and personal data are occupying about 1.4Gb
of disk space in the database. So we can figure roughly 250Mb per 1000
entries, or 25Gb per 1 million."
These are simple facial images, of about 7k each - thumbnails are about
3k each.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Paulo Scardine | 2003-09-09 21:11:36 | Re: Maximum table size |
Previous Message | Dann Corbit | 2003-09-09 20:52:35 | Re: Maximum table size |