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

Re: Simple database, multiple instances?

From: Mario Splivalo <mario(dot)splivalo(at)megafon(dot)hr>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Simple database, multiple instances?
Date: 2010-11-30 12:31:28
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
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 GogalaDate: 2010-11-30 16:26:04
Subject: Re: SELECT INTO large FKyed table is slow
Previous:From: Dimitri FontaineDate: 2010-11-30 11:45:57
Subject: Re: Simple database, multiple instances?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group