Re: Migrating to Postgresql and new hardware

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, Lars <la(at)unifaun(dot)com>, mark <dvlhntr(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Migrating to Postgresql and new hardware
Date: 2011-01-20 15:43:43
Message-ID: AANLkTinTcEd8SwkwexHPG=i+iKx+w4EUW8+wW_x94GVZ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> wrote:

> Or... PG is just so good we've never had to use more than one database
> server!  :-)

Hehe, while you can do a lot with one server, there are some scenarios
where sharding is the answer. I have a horror story about not
sharding when we should have I can tell you over a beer sometime.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Cédric Villemain 2011-01-20 16:16:05 Re: anti-join chosen even when slower than old plan
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-01-20 15:25:39 Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences