From: Brian Hurt <bhurt@janestcapital.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
To: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Postgres and really huge tables
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:31:35 -0500
Message-ID: <45AFD927.9050605@janestcapital.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <456DB8C9.7020206@cheapcomplexdevices.com>
References: <4939.1164740825@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<200611282344.kASNijt09203@momjian.us>
<456CE066.50803@cheapcomplexdevices.com>
<456D8A65.3080400@janestcapital.com>
<1164812624.9690.500.camel@archimedes>
<456DA476.4000606@janestcapital.com>
<456DB8C9.7020206@cheapcomplexdevices.com>
Is there any experience with Postgresql and really huge tables? I'm
talking about terabytes (plural) here in a single table. Obviously the
table will be partitioned, and probably spread among several different
file systems. Any other tricks I should know about?
We have a problem of that form here. When I asked why postgres wasn't
being used, the opinion that postgres would "just <explicitive> die" was
given. Personally, I'd bet money postgres could handle the problem (and
better than the ad-hoc solution we're currently using). But I'd like a
couple of replies of the form "yeah, we do that here- no problem" to
wave around.
Brian
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: bhurt@janestcapital.com, pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Postgres and really huge tables
In-Reply-To: <45AFD927.9050605@janestcapital.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
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