I agree that RAID provides similar performance benifits especially with striping io 
benifits, however it is powerful and ideal to have both options.  For example you may 
have a set of tables that are read-only for reporting and another set mostly write 
only.   You could have they resting on different raid configurations ideal for each 
situtation.  
 
I also agree there are several admin benifits in the areas of backup.  You can also 
more easily create different frequency/schedules of backup for certain critical tables 
to a different schedule than other less important tables.   The flexibility of easily 
growing your database beyond the current disk because of size limitations can be a 
life savior.
 
brian

        -----Original Message----- 
        From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
        Sent: Wed 1/21/2004 12:22 PM 
        To: Brian Maguire 
        Cc: 
        Subject: RE: [GENERAL] tablespaces a priority for 7.5?
        
        

        In RAID era tablespaces are not such important regarding performance. 

        But for backup/restore - the ability to backup/restore selected tablespaces 
        while leaving other tablespaces is a big thing. 
        The whole point here is: it is assumed that backup/restore of tablespaces can 
        hapen quite quickly and as simple as to copy tablespace files from one 
        location to another(even while database is on - WAL can be used to handle 
        this) - this is compared to dump. 

        For example, index, tempoarary data tablespaces can be lost - not a big deal. 

        Undo(rollback) tablespaces - in a way can be lost as well. 
        While system data tablespace (table structure, stored procedures, etc) - at 
        no cost should be lost.  
        The same way application can be devided in "critical" and "not critical" 
        tablespaces and their backups maintained accordingly. For example, it may not 
        be a big deal to lose year 1996 tables while year 2004 tables should be 
        online. 


        Laimis 

        > -----Original Message----- 
        > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
        > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Maguire 
        > Sent: 21. janÃar 2004 16:06 
        > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
        > Subject: [GENERAL] tablespaces a priority for 7.5? 
        > 
        > 
        > Is support for tablespaces a priority feature for 7.5? I 
        > believe there has been significant development in this area 
        > and it seems that postgres' file structure opens it up nicely 
        > to support it.  What are the chances this will be completed?  
        > 
        > In my opinion, it really is a critical feature to support and 
        > administer enterprise databases.  All the major databases 
        > currently support this and it is a compelling enough reason 
        > drive big users from away from using postgres for their 
        > enterprise/large databases.  It really is a database 
        > administrator's feature.  
        > 
        >  
        > Brian 
        >  
        > 
        > ---------------------------(end of 
        > broadcast)--------------------------- 
        > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? 
        > 
                       http://archives.postgresql.org 


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to