From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
---|---|
To: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: About page on .org site |
Date: | 2015-09-27 19:12:24 |
Message-ID: | 56083F98.7080907@kaltenbrunner.cc |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On 09/27/2015 01:39 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 26 September 2015 at 22:21, Peter Geoghegan
> <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> The page http://www.postgresql.org/about/ states:
>>
>> "There are active PostgreSQL systems in production environments that
>> manage in excess of 4 terabytes of data."
>>
>> This seems like an obsolete comment. There are single node databases
>> that Heroku controls that are larger than that now. I doubt Heroku
>> really pushes PostgreSQL to its limits in this dimension, and it seems
>> reasonable to suppose some production PostgreSQL databases are far
>> larger these days.
>
> Indeed. The San Diego Supercomputer Center mentions having a 50TB
> PostgreSQL database, and there are no doubt much larger databases than
> that around too:
> http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/pressrelease/sdscs_gordon_supercomputer_parsing_genes_proteins_and_big_bio_data
/about/ is horribly outdated and in serious need of an overhaul(it was
last updated in 2007/2008!), the 4TB thing is just the tip of the
iceberg - see also
Somebody really should take the time and rewrite that thing sentence by
sentence...
Stefan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-09-27 19:16:51 | Re: About page on .org site |
Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2015-09-26 23:39:25 | Re: About page on .org site |