-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
> The reason why I think the data will not fit into one database, > is because I just do not have money for servers (everything is coming > out of my small pocket) so I just want to deploy inexpensive computers > but add them as I get more data to serve. I think you might be suffering from premature optimization. Or just wildly optimistic on your hardware needs. Postgres scales vertically extremely well, so I'd try out a single server and add sharding complexity only as a last resort. For scaling, you can use pgbouncer, spread the tables and indexes across different tablespaces, and other tricks. If money is tight, you might look into using something like EC2. - -- Greg Sabino Mullane g...@turnstep.com End Point Corporation PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200907141552 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEAREDAAYFAkpc4ioACgkQvJuQZxSWSsga/gCfQUp+AHnX1myAO6hYpnmIMk+8 5ZIAoKAOsJepWnavWwVMkdb2h4eOfYt5 =En0J -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
