| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | stange(at)rentec(dot)com, Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, Joshua Marsh <icub3d(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( |
| Date: | 2005-11-21 19:51:47 |
| Message-ID: | 20051121195147.GC26621@surnet.cl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Greg Stark wrote:
> I also fear that heading in that direction could push Postgres even further
> from the niche of software that works fine even on low end hardware into the
> realm of software that only works on high end hardware. It's already suffering
> a bit from that.
What's high end hardware for you? I do development on a Celeron 533
machine with 448 MB of RAM and I find it to work well (for a "slow"
value of "well", certainly.) If you're talking about embedded hardware,
that's another matter entirely and I don't think we really support the
idea of running Postgres on one of those things.
There's certainly true in that the memory requirements have increased a
bit, but I don't think it really qualifies as "high end" even on 8.1.
--
Alvaro Herrera Developer, http://www.PostgreSQL.org
Jude: I wish humans laid eggs
Ringlord: Why would you want humans to lay eggs?
Jude: So I can eat them
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bill McGonigle | 2005-11-21 19:58:18 | Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2005-11-21 19:01:26 | Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( |