Re: Re: [HACKERS] 8Ko limitation

From: Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer(at)pasteur(dot)fr>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: [HACKERS] 8Ko limitation
Date: 2000-07-20 09:02:50
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.3.96.1000720110001.11997C-100000@ara.zf.jcu.cz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers


On Thu, 20 Jul 2000, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> On Thursday 20 July 2000, at 10 h 0, the keyboard of Karel Zak
> <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> wrote:
>
> > And what is a "large database"? 1, 5 .. 10Gb? If yes, (IMHO) the PostgreSQL
> > is good choice.
>
> Even on Linux? I'm studying a database project where the raw data is 10 to 20
> Gb (it will be in several tables in the same database). Linux has a limit of 2
> Gb for a file (even on 64-bits machine, if I'm correct). A colleague told me
> to use NetBSD instead, because PostgreSQL on a Linux machine cannot host more
> than 2 Gb per database. Any practical experience? (I'm not interested in "It
> should work".)

I must again say: "The PostgreSQL is good choice" :-)

The postgres chunks DB files, not exist 2Gb limit here...

Karel

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message anuj 2000-07-20 11:45:17 RE: Return PGresult
Previous Message Louis-David Mitterrand 2000-07-20 08:54:50 currval(seq) fails if no nextval(seq) first

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2000-07-20 09:30:54 Re: Hello PL/Python
Previous Message Jules Bean 2000-07-20 08:52:01 Re: Re: [HACKERS] 8Ko limitation