From: | Kelvin Quee <kelvinq(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | JiaYi Lee <leejiayi(at)gmail(dot)com>, lim(dot)ck(dot)michael(at)gmail(dot)com, elias(dot)soong(at)gmail(dot)com |
Subject: | Master/Slave, DB separation or just spend $$$? |
Date: | 2009-07-22 03:47:43 |
Message-ID: | 4e9464f90907212047p799db680o650b4a9754547d63@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi Performance Wizards!
I need advice on this.
I have a db which is being constantly updated and queried by a few
computers. We are doing datamining. The machine is running on a
moderately powered machine and processors constantly hit 90%.
At the same time, we need to present these data on a web interface.
The performance for the web interface is now very sluggish as most of
the power is occupied by the mining process.
I have thought of a few ways out of this -
1) Buy a mega powered machine (temporal solution, quick fix)
2) Do a master-slave configuration
3) Separate the DB into 2 - One for pure mining purposes, the other
purely for web serving
For (2), I do not know if it will be very effective since the master
will probably have many changes at any moment. I do not understand how
the changes will be propagated from the master to the slave without
impacting the slave's performance. Anyone with more experience here?
(3) seems ideal but is a very very painful solution!
We can possibly use a message queue system but again I am not familiar
with MQ. Will need to do more research.
If you were me, how would you solve this problem?
Thanks!
Kelvin Quee
+65 9177 3635
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2009-07-22 05:11:15 | Re: Atomic access to large arrays |
Previous Message | Victor de Buen (Bayes) | 2009-07-21 23:43:35 | Atomic access to large arrays |