| From: | Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Quesion about querying distributed databases |
| Date: | 2025-03-06 06:22:38 |
| Message-ID: | CANzqJaBP6CWiUnAARTS=GJzkk-8sqt-mLZZgz9NOyHs-V4-M5w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 9:44 PM me nefcanto <sn(dot)1361(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I once worked with a monolithic SQL Server database with more than 10
> billion records and about 8 Terabytes of data. A single backup took us more
> than 21 days. It was a nightmare.
>
25 years ago (meaning *much* slower hardware), I managed a 1TB database.
Backups took about 4 hours. Could have gotten it down to two hours if I'd
wanted to use more tape drives.
Right now, I manage a 5TB database. Backups take 110 minutes, and that's
when using one channel for all IO, writing to not the fastest NAS, and
other 3+TB databases backing up to it at the same time.
> Almost everybody knows that scaling up has a ceiling
>
And that ceiling is much, much higher than you think it is.
> , but scaling out has no boundaries.
>
Except for complexity and fragility. I bet I could get good scaled up
performance out of the amount of hardware you're using to scale out.
--
Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce.
Don't boil me, I'm still alive.
<Redacted> lobster!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Abraham, Danny | 2025-03-06 07:39:17 | Asking for OK for a nasty trick to resolve PG CVE-2025-1094 i |
| Previous Message | Rob Sargent | 2025-03-06 03:43:56 | Re: Quesion about querying distributed databases |