On 11/30/2010 12:45 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Mario Splivalo<mario(dot)splivalo(at)megafon(dot)hr> writes:
>> I have simple database schema, containing just three tables:
>> samples, drones, drones_history.
>> Now, those tables hold data for the drones for a simulation. Each simulation
>> dataset will grow to around 10 GB in around 6 months.
>> Since the data is not related in any way I was thinking in separating each
>> simulation into it's own database. That way it would be much easier for me
>> to, at later date, move some of the databases to other servers (when dataset
>> grows beyond the original server storage capacity limit).
> Do you intend to run queries across multiple simulations at once? If
> yes, you want to avoid multi databases. Other than that, I'd go with a
> naming convention like samples_<simulation id> and maybe some
> inheritance to ease querying multiple simulations.
Nope, those 'realms' are completely separated, I'll just have hundreds
of them. But each of them is in it's separate 'universe', they're not
aware of each other in any way (i might be creating some statistics, but
that is going to be really rarely).
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Mladen Gogala||Date: 2010-11-30 16:26:04|
|Subject: Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow|
|Previous:||From: Dimitri Fontaine||Date: 2010-11-30 11:45:57|
|Subject: Re: Simple database, multiple instances?|