Ron Johnson <ronljohnso...@gmail.com> wrote: > "OK" is relative, but it's what we did in a similar situation: two years > of data on-line and 5 years of data in compressed files in S3. (We're > required to keep data for 7 years, but they *never* ask for records more > than 2 years old. If they ever do, we'll manually load the relevant data > back into PG.) > (I can't imagine that querying billions of unindexed flat-file records via > S3 would be fast.) > How often do end users look for data more than 90 days old? Two years old? > How quickly does the old data need to be available? > Maybe a four-tiered system of PG-Snowflake-S3-S3_Glacier would balance > speed and cost (or maybe Snowflake would just drive up costs).
Thank You so much Ron. When you said "*two years of data on-line and 5 years of data in compressed files in S3*." So do you mean two years of data in aurora postgre which will be OLTP database and rest just dump as is in S3 bucket and when we need any such query for those data , just simply read and dump those S3 files back in the aurora postgre? In the currently running oracle exadata system , it has SIX months of data (which is ~200TB) and the transaction tables are all range partitioned on a daily basis. And out of that ~2months of data gets frequently queried and other ~4months of data gets queried less frequently. However, in the target architecture which we want to build on cloud here, there are some requirements for the analytics/data science team to query ~3years history. Beyond ~3years we may need that data rarely. We were initially thinking of just having one database to serve both OLTP and OLAP use cases(somewhat like oracle exadata currently doing for us) but it seems we don't have such an option here on AWS. Postgre will serve OLTP use case whereas Snowflake will serve OLAP use case. So do you suggest having both the databases in use, like recent transaction data for last 3 months should be streamed to aurora postgre, then from 3months till 3years of data should be parked in snowflake which will serve OLAP/analytics use case. and from 3years till 10years will be kept in S3 (as parquet or Iceberg format) so that even Snowflake can query those directly when needed. OR Do you suggest just keeping last ~3months of data on Aurora postgre and rest everything on snowflake considering it will store those as compressed format and also storage is cheap(23$ per TB per month)? Few colleagues are pointing to databricks for the analytics use case. Is that a good option here? On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 16:43, veem v <veema0...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello All, > Although it's not exactly related to opensource postgre but want to ask > this question here to understand colleagues' view, considering having > decades of experience in the database world, We want some guidance, if the > below design looks okay for our customer use case. > > We currently have financial systems transaction data streams to Oracle > exadata(X9) on-premise. This database supports processing of 400million > transactions per day. A single transaction for us is a combination of 7-8 > inserts into different transaction tables with Indexes , unique constraints > etc defined on those. The transactions processed/committed in batches(~1000 > batch size) in the database. And this system persists data for ~6 months. > We do have all sorts of OLAP(daily/monthly batch reports running) > applications run on the same database along with some user facing UI > applications showing customer transactions. So it's basically currently > serving a hybrid workload and is one stop solution for all use cases. > > Many of the applications are moving from on premise to AWS cloud as part > of modernization journey and AWS being chosen cloud partner also the > product is expected to expand across more regions and this system is > expected to serve increase in the transaction volume. And also we have a > requirement to persist transaction data for ~10years to have those > available for analytics/data science use cases. > > So the team is thinking of splitting it into two parts > 1)OLTP type use case in which we will persist/write the transaction data > faster and show it to the UI related apps , in near real time/quickest > possible time. and this database will store Max 60-90 days of transaction > data. Not sure if we have an option of Oracle exadata equivalent on AWS, so > team planning of using/experimenting with Aurora postgres. Please correct > me, if there are any other options we should use otherwise? > > 2)Then move the data beyond ~90 days into another database or object > storage S3 which will keep it there for ~10 years and will be queryable > using the necessary API's. That is supposed to cater to Olap/analytics/data > science use cases etc. > > Is the above design is okay? and also in regards to the second point above > i.e. persisting the historical data (that to be in queryable state), should > we go for some database like snowflake or should just keep it on S3 as is > and make those queryable through APIs. Please advice? >
