Re: Basic questions before start

gogulus(at)eqnet(dot)hu wrote:
How are you going to synchronize the databases on the client boxes with
your 'Master database'?

And how are your clients going to be able to use "some statistical data
on other clients" when "there is no network connection"? Or did you mean
that the connection to the "Master database" is down, but the clients
are still able to talk to each other?
That would be kinda weir (why would that happen), and still... are you
planning to have each client to write its statistical data to *all* the
client databases at once? What will you do if some writes succeed, and
some fail?

... and also, if you do this, why do you need that 'Master database' at
all to begin with?

Dima

>Hello,
>
> I am planning to implement a system, where there is one Master database running on a Linux box with as many resources as necessary, and there are one or more client pc computers,with processor speed of 100 Mhz, memory of 32-64 Mbytes and a 10Mb/s network card.
>
> The major task is that the clients should work on the actual state of data, which means the basic database (data, unchangeable for clients), and some statistical data on other clients, and they should not stop work when there is no network connection to the master pc. They should give back their detailed transactions on the basic data to the master pc.
>
> For this reason I consider to run postgres on the client computers, but I am quite concerned about system overhead.
>
> The clients will only do basic database work:
> - selects from the database, without nested selects (or with nested selects with the maximum of 1-2 levels)
> - writing their transactions into the database, with commit/rollback functionality.
> - update some tables because of synchronization with master db.
> - update some tables to summarize the value of transactions. (They could be done by triggers, but if they need resources, there is an existing solution with basic operations).
>
> Size of the database: The basic data includes 50-100.000 elements in 3-4 tables each, and much less data in other tables. The number of tables is around 100.
>
> I would like to know the opinion of experienced users of Postgres, if I can embark upon this road, or should choose an other way which uses an other db system with lower resource-needs.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Gogulus
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
>