On 19 May 2011 04:08, Craig Ringer <cr...@postnewspapers.com.au> wrote:
> On 05/19/2011 04:33 AM, Szymon Guz wrote: > >> >> >> On 18 May 2011 22:22, Ireneusz Pluta <ipl...@wp.pl >> <mailto:ipl...@wp.pl>> wrote: >> >> W dniu 2011-05-18 13:21, Szymon Guz pisze: >> >> Hi, >> I've got a question about quite a strange configuration. >> I was asked if we can have one storage, with one data directory >> where one postgresql instance writes data, and many other >> instances read those. >> Is that possible without any replication and copying data? >> >> >> Why do they think they need that? >> >> >> They've got some quite nice and huge storage and it would be nice to use >> it from many different machines running postgreses. >> Another option is Oracle which can do that. >> > > If you're thinking of Oracle RAC: be careful. Anecdotal reports I've heard > suggest that a RAC cluster needs to be about 3 machines before it equals the > performance of a single standalone Oracle instance on same kind of hardware. > I have no personal experience with this, though, and am under the impression > that the people I've heard talking about it were referring to multi-master > setups. It's possible that single-master setups with read-only slaves are > more efficient. It's also possible that they were just wrong. All I'm saying > is that you should investigate carefully. > > -- > Craig Ringer > Hi, thanks for the answer. It is not a problem to have 3 oracle instances, in fact there will be hundreds of them probably, but could also be hundreds of Postgres instances :) regards Szymon
