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

Re: how good is PostgreSQL

From: Tim Kientzle <kientzle(at)acm(dot)org>
To: Arnold Gamboa <arnold(at)php4us(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: how good is PostgreSQL
Date: 2000-11-01 00:20:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
a) Don't log to a database.  Log data should be sent into a process
   that collects any needed on-the-fly statistics and then outputs
   into disk files (rotating hourly or daily depending on your needs).
   This model is becoming pretty standard with Apache now; look at
   rotatelog in the Apache distribution for an example.

b) Number of records isn't really the issue.  Query complexity and
   number of queries are more pertinent.  Generally, for example, a
   single SELECT that pulls in multiple rows is much faster than
   a bunch of small SELECTs.

c) For very high traffic, you are going to have multiple front-end
   servers.  If you design the system carefully, you can have a single
   shared network disk used by all of your front ends, then just stack
   boxes in front of it.  This doesn't give you endless scalability,
   at some point you'll saturate your network file server and/or

d) PHP may not be a great choice.  It doesn't provide a lot of hooks
   for effective caching of database connections and/or results.
   mod_perl or Java servlets may be better, depending on the details.

				- Tim Kientzle

Arnold Gamboa wrote:
> Hi,
> For users of large PostgreSQL and PostgreSQL builders, this is for you.
> I'm having a terrible time deciding now. :(
> We're about to build a "huge" website now.  I got tied up in signing the
> contract without really getting enough information about PgSQL since this
> what we plan to implement with PHP (normally we use mySQL but i guess it
> does not fit for huge databases like that).
> Here's my problem.. We're about to build a site like where there
> is a large amount of database required.. If say there is 100,000 users with
> 1000 page hits per day for each, and everything will be logged, you could
> imagine how huge this will be.  I'm just so "nervous" (really, that's the
> term) if we implement this and later on experience a slow down or worse than
> that, crash in the server.
> My questions are:
> 1. What is the limit for number of records in a table WITHOUT SUFFERING SLOW
> 2. ....limit in number of tables per database
> 3. ... limit in number of database.
> Thanks for you comments.  I would really appreciate every comment that I'll
> receive regarding this.
> Arnold

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: KuroiNekoDate: 2000-11-01 00:26:44
Subject: Re: Query cache import?
Previous:From: Karel ZakDate: 2000-11-01 00:16:42
Subject: Re: Query cache import?

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Steve WolfeDate: 2000-11-01 00:39:54
Subject: Re: how good is PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Poul L. ChristiansenDate: 2000-10-31 23:44:57
Subject: Re: Query caching

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group