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

Partitioning / Clustering

From: Alex Stapleton <alexs(at)advfn(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Partitioning / Clustering
Date: 2005-05-10 10:03:26
Message-ID: 5F94B6EB-3925-4CD3-A67F-4310890B438A@advfn.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
What is the status of Postgres support for any sort of multi-machine  
scaling support? What are you meant to do once you've upgraded your  
box and tuned the conf files as much as you can? But your query load  
is just too high for a single machine?

Upgrading stock Dell boxes (I know we could be using better machines,  
but I am trying to tackle the real issue) is not a hugely price  
efficient way of getting extra performance, nor particularly scalable  
in the long term.

So, when/is PG meant to be getting a decent partitioning system?  
MySQL is getting one (eventually) which is apparently meant to be  
similiar to Oracle's according to the docs. Clusgres does not appear  
to be widely/or at all used, and info on it seems pretty thin on the  
ground, so I am
not too keen on going with that. Is the real solution to multi- 
machine partitioning (as in, not like MySQLs MERGE tables) on  
PostgreSQL actually doing it in our application API? This seems like  
a less than perfect solution once we want to add redundancy and  
things into the mix. 

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Guillaume NobironDate: 2005-05-10 13:01:13
Subject: Swapping and Kernel 2.6
Previous:From: Kim BisgaardDate: 2005-05-10 09:03:34
Subject: full outer performance problem

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