RE: [GENERAL] Queries across multiple databases (was: SELECT from a table in another database).
Oracle financials has about 2000 tables in a single database : but of course that must not be designed using structured design techniques. -- Ian Willis -Original Message- From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, 19 May 2001 12:45 AM To: Trygve Falch Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Queries across multiple databases (was: SELECT from a table in another database). Trygve Falch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And putting 200+ tables in one single database is not an option. Why not? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
RE: [GENERAL] Ideal hardware configuration for pgsql
I would make sure that an intel box won't suit before looking at sun. Simply for cost and if you're planning to run linux on it sun support will be shit because they don't have skills in that area. Databases thrive on more spindles, separate system spindles from the db spindles and swap spindles, look at separating index tables from data tables and the WAL. Raid 3 or striping may be more suitable for the WAL (what happens if you loose the WAL?) whereas raid 5 or a combination for 1/5 for data and indexes. The chunk size on a raid set may also be worth pursuing as a means of squeezing better performance from a dedicated db machine. -- Ian Willis Systems Administrator Division of Entomology CSIRO GPO Box 1700 Canberra ACT 2601 ph 02 6246 4391 fax 02 6246 4000 -Original Message- From: Ryan Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 2 May 2001 8:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [GENERAL] Ideal hardware configuration for pgsql Our db server running 7.1 got *torched* today, system ran between 30% an 80% CPU all day! Right now the server is running on a Penguin Computing 800mhz PIII w/ 128 ram and IDE hardware. Tomorrow I'd like to place an order for something more robust... looking into dual PIII, gig of ram and SCSI Raid. Planning on running Red Hat 7.1 on this machine. Before I order, I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions or recommendations. I have been considering getting a Sun machine... but I don't know if there is a benefit. Also, are there any special considerations when running RAID and dual CPU? You're input is tremendously appreciated! -r Ryan Mahoney CTO, Payment Alliance, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] t. 718-721-0338 m. 718-490-5464 www.paymentalliance.net ---(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
RE: [GENERAL] Ideal hardware configuration for pgsql
I think that all this fat should be put on the fire. A nice performance test on the same high end hardware would be good. Is there a test suite that would suit? Would anyone expect more than a 5% difference in performance between the OS's even using the dreaded ext2 and not the reiserfs or SGI XFS. There could there be wagers between the loudest in both camps? A 5% betting premium could apply with all proceeds going to the postgresl development team :) My preference for using linux is that I like the licence and spirit of linux more and assuming that the performance difference is negligable I'll stick with it. Similiarly many find that the BSD licence and associated community's stricter development methodologies appeals more and they too will stick with that whilst there is a negligable performance difference. But realistly after using both I find that you can make one choke while the other sings if you chose your test carefully enough and currently they get similiar performance results on most general application tests. -- Ian Willis -Original Message- From: GH [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 3 May 2001 10:53 AM To: Ryan Mahoney Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Ideal hardware configuration for pgsql On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 08:07:04PM +0100, some SMTP stream spewed forth: I only have experience with Red Hat, Solaris 8 (intel), and LinuxPPC. What do you see as the downside of running Red Hat? My intention is to run RH 7.1, although I can surely be swayed if you can offer some compelling FreeBSD benefits. FreeBSD is out-of-the-box more secure, more stable, and generally more enjoyable to work with than RedHat. If you had ever seen the power and beauty of FreeBSD, you would not continue using RedHat by choice. You probably need to see it to believe it. I encourage you to check it out sometime, but you should have no problem at all running PostgreSQL on RedHat. I'm out. gh BTW, the input on hardware was very useful. I ordered a Dell today w/ gig ram, dual 1ghz PIII and Raid 1 18gig scsi hard drives. I'm excited! -r At 06:52 PM 5/2/01 -0500, GH wrote: On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 11:35:13PM +0100, some SMTP stream spewed forth: Our db server running 7.1 got *torched* today, system ran between 30% an 80% CPU all day! Right now the server is running on a Penguin Computing 800mhz PIII w/ 128 ram and IDE hardware. Tomorrow I'd like to place an order for something more robust... looking into dual PIII, gig of ram and SCSI Raid. Planning on running Red Hat 7.1 on this machine. I think that anyone whose opinion matters would recommend running something *other* than RedHat. FreeBSD is an excellent operating system and is well suited to a PostgreSQL environment. gh *snip* You're input is tremendously appreciated! -r Ryan Mahoney CTO, Payment Alliance, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] t. 718-721-0338 m. 718-490-5464 www.paymentalliance.net --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.250 / Virus Database: 123 - Release Date: 4/18/01 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.250 / Virus Database: 123 - Release Date: 4/18/01 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.250 / Virus Database: 123 - Release Date: 4/18/01 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
RE: [GENERAL] Best practice
What would the the best choice for the WAL mirroring, raid3 or 5. How big does the WAL grow? mirroring is fine as long as the size isn't too big. -- Ian Willis -Original Message- From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 20 April 2001 9:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Best practice [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We use Ingres where I work and when setting up a server we always try to ensure that the log and data files are on different spindles. This would be good practice in PG simply for performance reasons. Ideally the WAL log should be on a disk that has nothing else to do, so that you never have to seek somewhere else than the current WAL segment. I'm not sure that we can yet guarantee very much about recovery from disk hardware failures. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
RE: [GENERAL] Running several postmaster using same database in parallel
My guess is that the problem is a very difficult one to solve well. The backends have to reliably communicate between each other in order to stop two processes writing to the one record. The communication times between 2 processes on the one machine and on two different machines would be at least 1000 time greater. Think of cars going through an intersection with no traffic lights, just by slowing some cars up and speeding up others gaps can be made and the problem can be managed. Now think of the same problem with cars made 1000 time longer, your earlier solution no longer works so well and the best solution would be to build a different kind of intersection. The best way would be to make the road a lot wider and to use some sort of synchronous protocols like traffic lights :-) Implementations anyone -Original Message- From: Valter Mazzola [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 24 November 2000 7:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Running several postmaster using same database in parallel many users have asked for this feature (ie load balancing,clustering, of 1 postgresql database) but no answer from mailing-list, and no planning for this important feature, i don't understand why. Why not set-up a site to found this project with donations... on postgresql.org? valter mazzola _ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
[GENERAL] External Large objects what became of them
Does anyone know what the status of external large objects is? Did they disappear without a trace and will they ever make a comeback? I was reading about Xdelta the other night and I thought that postgresql would be a great interface for this sort of program if it still supported the interface.
