Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Hervé Piedvache <herve(at)elma(dot)fr>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
Date: 2005-01-20 14:51:21
Message-ID: 41EFC569.6030800@familyhealth.com.au (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
>>>Sorry but I don't agree with this ... Slony is a replication solution ...
>>>I don't need replication ... what will I do when my database will grow up
>>>to 50 Gb ... I'll need more than 50 Gb of RAM on each server ???
>>>This solution is not very realistic for me ...
>>>
>>>I need a Cluster solution not a replication one or explain me in details
>>>how I will do for managing the scalabilty of my database ...
>>
>>Buy Oracle
> 
> 
> I think this is not my solution ... sorry I'm talking about finding a 
> PostgreSQL solution ... 

My point being is that there is no free solution.  There simply isn't. 
I don't know why you insist on keeping all your data in RAM, but the 
mysql cluster requires that ALL data MUST fit in RAM all the time.

PostgreSQL has replication, but not partitioning (which is what you want).

So, your only option is Oracle or another very expensive commercial 
database.

Chris

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Hervé PiedvacheDate: 2005-01-20 14:54:23
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2005-01-20 14:49:56
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group