From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
Cc: | <CHEWTC(at)ap(dot)nec(dot)com(dot)sg>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Minimum hardware requirements for Postgresql db |
Date: | 2003-12-03 19:23:32 |
Message-ID: | 87smk166yz.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> > 3) Estimated number of transactions to be written into the Postgresql db is
> > around 15000 records per day.
> >
> > The growth rate in terms of number of connections is around 10% per year
> > and the data retention is kept on average at least for 18 months for the 2
> > databases.
> Like another poster pointed out, this is a walk in the park for
> postgresql. My workstation (1.1GHz celeron, 40 gig IDE drive, 512 Meg
> memory) could handle this load while still being my workstation.
Well there's some info missing. Like what would you actually be _doing_ with
these data?
15,000 inserts per day is nothing. But after 18 months that's over 5M records
not including the 10% growth rate. 5M records isn't really all that much but
it's enough that it's possible to write slow queries against it.
If you're doing big batch updates or complex reports against the data that
will be more interesting than the inserts.
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Al Hulaton | 2003-12-03 19:31:26 | Re: Minimum hardware requirements for Postgresql db |
Previous Message | Ivar Zarans | 2003-12-03 18:29:52 | Slow UPDATE, INSERT OK |