pg.ddx.io pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedstore different tables in different locations
7+ messages / 3 participants
[nested] [flat]
* store different tables in different locations
@ 2008-04-04 02:35 Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Duan Ligong @ 2008-04-04 02:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Hi, all
I have several questions to bother you. :)
1 For postgresql, is it POSSIBLE to store different tables in different
locations where we specify?
For one postgresql management process, is it POSSIBLE to store different
database in different
locations where we specify?
2 Is it appropriate to use Postgresql to store data for the following
situation:
The whole system consists of about 400 machines and I have to develop a
program collecting the
information about capacity and performance and networt setting and so on of
each machines and
displaying them for the administrators and some related guys. Moreover, I
have to store some
history data to display graphes and curvers. My design is as follows: one
daemon process running on
each machine to collect data and send it to the database which is in one
specified machine.
The bad thing is that the size of database is asked to be resricted in 900MB
for some reasons.
The questions are:
(a) Is it appropriate to use postgresql database in this case? If not, any
sugguestion will be appreciated.
In fact considered using common file to store data. but you know, it is
possible that daemon processes
on other 399 machines send data simultaneously, ...
(b) It seems hard to estimate the maximum size of the database, because
frequently updating and
inserting opreations will cause unused space not acclaiming in time and we
have to routinely vaccum.
Is there any good and easy, :) way to estimate the maximum size of
postgresql database accurately?
Best regards,
Duan
--
Duan Ligong
TEL : 0561-75-1925-6201
800-81-569-6201
E-Mail : l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* store different tables in different locations
@ 2008-04-04 04:11 Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Duan Ligong @ 2008-04-04 04:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Hi, all
I have several questions to bother you. :)
1 For postgresql, is it POSSIBLE to store different tables in different
locations where we specify? For one postgresql management process,
is it POSSIBLE to store different database in differentlocations
where we specify?
2 Is it appropriate to use Postgresql to store data for the following
situation:
The whole system consists of about 400 machines and I have to
develop a program collecting the information about capacity and
performance and networt setting and so on of each machines
and displaying them for the administrators and some related
guys. Moreover, I have to store some history data to display graphes
and curvers. My design is as follows: one daemon process running
on each machine to collect data and send it to the database which
is in one specified machine.
The bad thing is that the size of database is asked to be resricted
in 900MB for some reasons.
The questions are:
(a) Is it appropriate to use postgresql database in this case?
If not, any sugguestion will be appreciated.
In fact considered using common file to store data. but you know,
it is possible that daemon processes on other 399 machines send data
simultaneously, ...
(b) It seems hard to estimate the maximum size of the database,
because frequently updating and inserting opreations will cause unused
space not acclaiming in time and we have to routinely vaccum.
Is there any good and easy, :) way to estimate the maximum size of
postgresql database accurately?
Best regards,
Duan
--
Duan Ligong
TEL : 0561-75-1925-6201
800-81-569-6201
E-Mail : l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: store different tables in different locations
@ 2008-04-04 06:21 Julius Tuskenis <julius@nsoft.lt>
parent: Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Julius Tuskenis @ 2008-04-04 06:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Hello,
1) To store tables in different locations use different tablespaces,
witch can be stored in different locations in your hard drive. Same goes
for the databases.
2)
a) Postgresql is fine data base management system, so I see no reasons
why you should not use it.
b) I'm not sure I fully understand you on that one. You want to
estimate, that after inserting some record into your database it will
reach your maximum size? Any way I don't know how to do this...
Duan Ligong rašė:
> Hi, all
>
> I have several questions to bother you. :)
>
> 1 For postgresql, is it POSSIBLE to store different tables in
> different locations where we specify? For one postgresql management
> process,
> is it POSSIBLE to store different database in differentlocations
> where we specify?
>
> 2 Is it appropriate to use Postgresql to store data for the following
> situation:
> The whole system consists of about 400 machines and I have to develop
> a program collecting the information about capacity and performance
> and networt setting and so on of each machines and displaying them for
> the administrators and some related guys. Moreover, I have to store
> some history data to display graphes
> and curvers. My design is as follows: one daemon process running on
> each machine to collect data and send it to the database which is in
> one specified machine.
> The bad thing is that the size of database is asked to be resricted in
> 900MB for some reasons.
> The questions are:
> (a) Is it appropriate to use postgresql database in this case? If not,
> any sugguestion will be appreciated.
> In fact considered using common file to store data. but you know,
> it is possible that daemon processes on other 399 machines send data
> simultaneously, ...
>
> (b) It seems hard to estimate the maximum size of the database,
> because frequently updating and inserting opreations will cause unused
> space not acclaiming in time and we have to routinely vaccum.
> Is there any good and easy, :) way to estimate the maximum size of
> postgresql database accurately?
>
> Best regards,
> Duan
>
>
> --
> Duan Ligong
> TEL : 0561-75-1925-6201
> 800-81-569-6201
> E-Mail : l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com
>
--
Julius Tuskenis
Programuotojas
UAB nSoft
mob. +37068233050
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: store different tables in different locations
@ 2008-04-04 07:32 Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
parent: Julius Tuskenis <julius@nsoft.lt>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Duan Ligong @ 2008-04-04 07:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Julius Tuskenis wrote:
> Hello,
> 1) To store tables in different locations use different tablespaces, witch
> can be stored in different locations in your hard drive. Same goes for the
> databases.
Thanks a lot and it would be helpful. :)
I am a newbie to postgresql and maybe I should read the manuual first.
> 2)
> a) Postgresql is fine data base management system, so I see no reasons why
> you should not use it.
we use postgresql to store so little data as only 600MB or so, while for
this,
we have to do consume some efforts on managing and maintaining the
database. I am not sure whether it is a good and wise design.
Is there any more wiser design for this case?
> b) I'm not sure I fully understand you on that one. You want to estimate,
> that after inserting some record into your database it will reach your
> maximum size? Any way I don't know how to do this...
For some reason the size of database is asked to restrict to 900MB.
So I have to make efforts to make sure that its size is less than 900MB.
Maybe I should not do it. :)
Thanks a lot
Duan
> Duan Ligong rašė:
>> Hi, all
>>
>> I have several questions to bother you. :)
>>
>> 1 For postgresql, is it POSSIBLE to store different tables in different
>> locations where we specify? For one postgresql management process,
>> is it POSSIBLE to store different database in differentlocations
>> where we specify?
>>
>> 2 Is it appropriate to use Postgresql to store data for the following
>> situation:
>> The whole system consists of about 400 machines and I have to develop a
>> program collecting the information about capacity and performance and
>> networt setting and so on of each machines and displaying them for the
>> administrators and some related guys. Moreover, I have to store some
>> history data to display graphes
>> and curvers. My design is as follows: one daemon process running on each
>> machine to collect data and send it to the database which is in one
>> specified machine.
>> The bad thing is that the size of database is asked to be resricted in
>> 900MB for some reasons.
>> The questions are:
>> (a) Is it appropriate to use postgresql database in this case? If not,
>> any sugguestion will be appreciated.
>> In fact considered using common file to store data. but you know,
>> it is possible that daemon processes on other 399 machines send data
>> simultaneously, ...
>>
>> (b) It seems hard to estimate the maximum size of the database, because
>> frequently updating and inserting opreations will cause unused
>> space not acclaiming in time and we have to routinely vaccum.
>> Is there any good and easy, :) way to estimate the maximum size of
>> postgresql database accurately?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Duan
>>
>>
>> --
>> Duan Ligong
>> TEL : 0561-75-1925-6201
>> 800-81-569-6201
>> E-Mail : l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com
>>
>
>
> --
> Julius Tuskenis
> Programuotojas
> UAB nSoft
> mob. +37068233050
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: store different tables in different locations
@ 2008-04-04 08:04 Julius Tuskenis <julius@nsoft.lt>
parent: Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Julius Tuskenis @ 2008-04-04 08:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ; +Cc: pgsql-admin
> we use postgresql to store so little data as only 600MB or so, while
> for this,
> we have to do consume some efforts on managing and maintaining the
> database. I am not sure whether it is a good and wise design.
> Is there any more wiser design for this case?
In my case postgresql is like "fire and forget". Once installed it needs
to be vacuumed regularly. Thats all. Well, backups also. What
maintenance do you do?
> For some reason the size of database is asked to restrict to 900MB.
> So I have to make efforts to make sure that its size is less than 900MB.
> Maybe I should not do it. :)
It depends on how much data you want to store. You said you have 400
machines in the network, so 900Mb limits you to ~2Mb per machine. You
decide if thats enough.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: store different tables in different locations
@ 2008-04-04 17:17 Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
parent: Julius Tuskenis <julius@nsoft.lt>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Shane Ambler @ 2008-04-04 17:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julius Tuskenis <julius@nsoft.lt>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
Julius Tuskenis wrote:
>> For some reason the size of database is asked to restrict to 900MB.
>> So I have to make efforts to make sure that its size is less than 900MB.
Two things I can think of that may get you a message like this.
1. Available disk space (or quotas for the postgres user) - which
partition is the db on and how much free space does it have?
2. You are storing all data in the same row and column (as in adding to
data there not inserting data into a new row) which is restricted to 1GB
What is the exact message you get in regards to this limit?
And where does this appear to come from?
--
Shane Ambler
pgSQL (at) Sheeky (dot) Biz
Get Sheeky @ http://Sheeky.Biz
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: store different tables in different locations
@ 2008-04-07 01:38 Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
parent: Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Duan Ligong @ 2008-04-07 01:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Shane Ambler wrote:
> Two things I can think of that may get you a message like this.
>
> 1. Available disk space (or quotas for the postgres user) - which
> partition is the db on and how much free space does it have?
Well, In order to keep my system running 7x24, I make a cluster for it
with the third-party cluster software and the size of mirror disk where the
data is rcped to the backup server in time automatically is 1GB.
> 2. You are storing all data in the same row and column (as in adding to
> data there not inserting data into a new row) which is restricted to 1GB
There are several tables where the rows are frequently updated and inserted
and deleted.
>
> What is the exact message you get in regards to this limit?
> And where does this appear to come from?
The size of mirror disk is 1GB, on which I cannot decided.
> --
>
> Shane Ambler
> pgSQL (at) Sheeky (dot) Biz
>
> Get Sheeky @ http://Sheeky.Biz
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-04-07 01:38 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-04-04 02:35 store different tables in different locations Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
2008-04-04 04:11 store different tables in different locations Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
2008-04-04 06:21 ` Julius Tuskenis <julius@nsoft.lt>
2008-04-04 07:32 ` Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
2008-04-04 08:04 ` Julius Tuskenis <julius@nsoft.lt>
2008-04-04 17:17 ` Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
2008-04-07 01:38 ` Duan Ligong <l-duan@zd.cnes.jp.nec.com>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox