X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4F879FA350 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 08:53:26 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 88897-01 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 08:53:14 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from relais.videotron.ca (relais.videotron.ca [24.201.245.36]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C68C69FA2F3 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 08:53:14 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([24.202.239.251]) by VL-MO-MR001.ip.videotron.ca (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-2.05 (built Apr 28 2005)) with ESMTP id <0J1V008U2NONCK20@VL-MO-MR001.ip.videotron.ca> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 07:53:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 07:55:58 -0400 From: David Gagnon Subject: Re: Is postgresql ca do the job for software deployed in ASP In-reply-to: <7F10D26ECFA1FB458B89C5B4B0D72C2B4E47B2@sesrv12.wirelesscar.com> To: Mikael Carneholm Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <44AA574E.1080404@siunik.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <7F10D26ECFA1FB458B89C5B4B0D72C2B4E47B2@sesrv12.wirelesscar.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200607/15 X-Sequence-Number: 19875 Hi All, First thanks for your help everyone! Mikael Carneholm wrote: > Do you really need to create one *DB* per client - that is, is one > schema (in the same DB) per client out of the question? If not, I would > look into moving all reference tables (read-only data, constants and > such) into a common schema (with read permission granted to each > client/role), that way reducing the amount of objects needed to be > created/maintained and at the same time reducing the memory requirements > (lots of shared objects == lots of reused shared buffers). For my application there is very little info I can share. Maybe less than 10 on 100 actually so I not sure it worth it ... > Set the > default_tablespace variable per client (login role) also so that the I/O > load can be balanced. A system based on Opterons such as the HP DL385 or > DL585 with two CPUs (or four if you go for the 585), 8-16Gb of RAM and a > decent storage system with 14-28 disks could be worth evaluating. > > /Mikael > I look into the HP DL385 and DL585 on HP site and they are price between 3000 and 15000$$ (base price). Thats quite a difference? So is the HP DL385 with 2 cpus will do the job ? http://h71016.www7.hp.com/dstore/ctoBases.asp?jumpid=re_NSS_dl585storageserver&oi=E9CED&BEID=19701&SBLID=&ProductLineId=450&FamilyId=2230&LowBaseId=&LowPrice=&familyviewgroup=405&viewtype=Matrix http://h71016.www7.hp.com/dstore/ctoBases.asp?ProductLineId=431&FamilyId=2048&jumpid=re_hphqiss/Ovw_Buy/DL385 I will look more deeply into them in detail trying to understand something ... Thanks for your help! Best Regards /David > -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of David > Gagnon > Sent: den 3 juli 2006 13:42 > To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org > Subject: [PERFORM] Is postgresql ca do the job for software deployed in > ASP ou SaaS mode? > > Hi all, > > I've been working on my personal project for 3.5 years now. I > developed an ERP system in web/java. Now the people I will work with > suggest to offers it in Saas mode. Which means my customer will connect > to my website and found they ERP software and data there. It's not the > deployment I planned initially so if you can just validate some > technicals points to be sure it's not crazy using Postgresl here and not > a big $$$ db to do the job. > > Typically I will have 1db per client and around 150 tables per db. So > since I hope I didn`t work all those year for nothing .. I expect to > have bunch of clients witch means the same amount of db since I have 1 > db/client. > > Can I hope having several hundred of db on 1 db server? Like 250 dbs = > 250 client = 360 000 tables !!! > So is there a limit for the number of db in the db server ?(this spec is > not on the website) What about the performance? Can I expect to have the > same performance? > > Since I put everything on the web I do needs an High Availability > infrastructure. I looked into SlonyI and Mammoth to replicate the db > but since SlonyI use triggers can I expect it to do the job? Is Mammoth > is the only available solution? > > Last question and not the least I'm reading this performance list for > several years now and know suggestion about hardware to run postgresl is > discussed. Since I wrote software there severals points about hardware > that I don`t understand. Do you have any suggestion of platform to run > into my Saas configuration? I do need the WISE one! I'm pretty sure > that if I was a big company I would be able throw bunch of $$$$ but it's > not my case. I'm pretty sure it exists out there some piece of Hardware > that would do the job perfectly with a fair price. > > So far I did understand that Postgresql loves Opteron and I have looked > into the dl145 series of HP. I did understand that Dell Hardware it`s > not reliable. But it's still not clear what should be my requirement > for memory, disk, nb cpu, cpu power, etc. > > I'm pretty sure it`s better to have more slower CPUs that having the > latest Opteron available on the market, or more slower servers that > having the fastest one... am I right? But agains what it`s the optimal > choice? > > Thanks you to share your knowledge on those point. I do consider using > Postgresql is the Smart choice in my project since the beginning but > before putting all the money (That I don`t have ..:-)) to buy some > hardware I just want to be sure I'm not crazy! > > Thanks for your help I really appreciate it!! > > Best Regards > /David > > > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org > > > > >