Re: PG Sharding

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 9:34 AM, Matej <gmatej(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Hi Everyone.
>
> We are looking at a rather large fin-tech installation. But as scalability
> requirements are high we look at sharding of-course.
>
> I have looked at many sources for Postgresql sharding, but we are a little
> confused as to shared with schema or databases or both.
>
>
> So far our understanding:
>
> *SCHEMA.*
>
> PROS:
> - seems native to PG
> - backup seems easier
> - connection pooling seems easier, as you can use same connection between
> shard.
>
> CONS:
> - schema changes seems litlle more complicated
> - heard of backup and maintenance problems
> - also some caching problems.
>
> *DATABASE:*
>
> PROS:
> - schema changes litlle easier
> - backup and administration seems more robust
>
> CONS:
> - heard of vacuum problems
> - connection pooling is hard, as 100 shards would mean 100 pools
>
>
> So what is actually the right approach? If anyone could shed some light
> on my issue.
>
> *Thanks*
>
>
>

*You might also want to consider GridSQL. IIRC it was originally developed
by EnterpriseDB. I saw a demo of it a few years ago and it was quite
impressive, *
*but I've had no interaction with it since, so you will have to judge for
yourself.*

*https://sourceforge.net/projects/gridsql/?source=navbar
<https://sourceforge.net/projects/gridsql/?source=navbar>*

--
*Melvin Davidson*
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.