Received: from localhost (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.204.191])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F7669FB2FB;
	Thu, 18 Jan 2007 16:36:59 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 35467-06; Thu, 18 Jan 2007 16:36:51 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from lists.commandprompt.com (host-254.commandprompt.net
	[207.173.203.254])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B45069FB2AD;
	Thu, 18 Jan 2007 16:36:51 -0400 (AST)
Received: from [192.168.1.50] (or-67-76-146-141.sta.embarqhsd.net
	[67.76.146.141]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by lists.commandprompt.com (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l0IKakFm006915
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:36:47 -0800
Message-ID: <45AFDB11.6050902@commandprompt.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:39:45 -0800
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Organization: Command Prompt, Inc.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070103)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian Hurt <bhurt@janestcapital.com>
CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Postgres and really huge tables
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>
	<45AFD927.9050605@janestcapital.com>
In-Reply-To: <45AFD927.9050605@janestcapital.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88.5,
	clamav-milter version 0.88.5 on projects.commandprompt.com
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Greylist: Sender succeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by
	milter-greylist-1.6 (lists.commandprompt.com [192.168.2.159]);
	Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:36:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200701/55
X-Sequence-Number: 10537

Brian Hurt wrote:
> 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.

It entirely depends on the machine and how things are accessed. In
theory you could have a multi-terabyte table but my question of course
is why in the world would you do that? That is what partitioning is for.

Regardless, appropriate use of things like partial indexes should make
it possible.

Joshua D. Drake


> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
> 
>                http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
> 


-- 

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
             http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/