Re: is postgres a good solution for billion record data

On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 7:32 AM, shahrzad khorrami
> <shahrzad(dot)khorrami(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> is postgres a good solution for billion record data, think of 300kb data
>> insert into db at each minutes, I'm coding with php
>> what do you recommend to manage these data?
>
> You'll want a server with LOTS of hard drives spinning under it.  Fast
> RAID controller with battery backed RAM.  Inserting the data is no
> problem. 300kb a minute is nothing.  My stats machine that handles
> about 2.5M rows a day during the week is inserting in the megabytes
> per second (it's also the search database so there's the indexer wtih
> 16 threads hitting it).  The stats part of the load is miniscule until
> you start retrieving large chunks of data, then it's mostly sequential
> reads in the 100+Megs a second.
>
> The more drives and the better the RAID controller you throw at the
> problem the better performance you'll get.  For the price of one
> oracle license for one core, you can build a damned find pgsql server
> or pair of servers.

Quick reference, you get one of these:

http://www.aberdeeninc.com/abcatg/Stirling-X888.htm

with dual 2.26GHz Nehalem CPUs, 48 Gigs ram, and 48 73K 15kRPM Seagate
barracudas for around $20,000. That's the same cost for a single
oracle license for one CPU. That's way overkill for what you're
talking about doing. A machine with 8 or 16 disks could easily handle
the load you're talking about.