Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 16:16, Merlin Moncure a écrit :
> > No please do not talk about this again ... I'm looking about a PostgreSQL
> > solution ... I know RAC ... and I'm not able to pay for a RAC certify
> > hardware configuration plus a RAC Licence.
>
> Are you totally certain you can't solve
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 16:23, Dave Cramer a écrit :
> Google uses something called the google filesystem, look it up in
> google. It is a distributed file system.
Yes that's another point I'm working on ... make a cluster of server using
GFS ... and making PostgreSQL running with it ...
But I
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 16:14, Steve Wampler a écrit :
> Once you've got the data partitioned, the question becomes one of
> how to inhance performance/scalability. Have you considered RAIDb?
No but I'll seems to be very interesting ... close to the explanation of
Joshua ... but automaticly don
Google uses something called the google filesystem, look it up in
google. It is a distributed file system.
Dave
Hervé Piedvache wrote:
Joshua,
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:44, Joshua D. Drake a écrit :
Hervé Piedvache wrote:
My company, which I actually represent,
> No please do not talk about this again ... I'm looking about a PostgreSQL
> solution ... I know RAC ... and I'm not able to pay for a RAC certify
> hardware configuration plus a RAC Licence.
Are you totally certain you can't solve your problem with a single server
solution?
How about:
Price ou
then I was thinking. Couldn't he use
multiple databases
over multiple servers with dblink?
It is not exactly how I would want to do it, but it would provide what
he needs I think???
Yes seems to be the only solution ... but I'm a little disapointed about
this ... could you explain me why the
Hervé Piedvache wrote:
No ... as I have said ... how I'll manage a database getting a table of may be
250 000 000 records ? I'll need incredible servers ... to get quick access or
index reading ... no ?
So what we would like to get is a pool of small servers able to make one
virtual server ...
* Herv? Piedvache ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I know they are not using PostgreSQL ... but how a company like Google do to
> get an incredible database in size and so quick access ?
They segment their data across multiple machines and have an algorithm
which tells the application layer which mac
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 16:05, Joshua D. Drake a écrit :
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >>> Or you could fork over hundreds of thousands of dollars for Oracle's
> >>> RAC.
> >>
> >> No please do not talk about this again ... I'm looking about a
> >> PostgreSQL solution ... I know RAC ... and
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Or you could fork over hundreds of thousands of dollars for Oracle's
RAC.
No please do not talk about this again ... I'm looking about a
PostgreSQL solution ... I know RAC ... and I'm not able to pay for a
RAC certify hardware configuration plus a RAC Licence.
Th
So what we would like to get is a pool of small servers able to make one
virtual server ... for that is called a Cluster ... no ?
I know they are not using PostgreSQL ... but how a company like Google do to
get an incredible database in size and so quick access ?
You could use dblink with mu
* Christopher Kings-Lynne ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> PostgreSQL has replication, but not partitioning (which is what you want).
It doesn't have multi-server partitioning.. It's got partitioning
within a single server (doesn't it? I thought it did, I know it was
discussed w/ the guy from Cox Co
No please do not talk about this again ... I'm looking about a PostgreSQL
solution ... I know RAC ... and I'm not able to pay for a RAC certify
hardware configuration plus a RAC Licence.
What you want does not exist for PostgreSQL. You will either
have to build it yourself or pay somebody to
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:51, Christopher Kings-Lynne a écrit :
> >>>Sorry but I don't agree with this ... Slony is a replication solution
> >>> ... I don't need replication ... what will I do when my database will
> >>> grow up to 50 Gb ... I'll need more than 50 Gb of RAM on each server
> >>> ?
Joshua,
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:44, Joshua D. Drake a écrit :
> Hervé Piedvache wrote:
> >
> >My company, which I actually represent, is a fervent user of PostgreSQL.
> >We used to make all our applications using PostgreSQL for more than 5
> > years. We usually do classical client/server appli
Or you could fork over hundreds of thousands of dollars for Oracle's
RAC.
No please do not talk about this again ... I'm looking about a PostgreSQL
solution ... I know RAC ... and I'm not able to pay for a RAC certify
hardware configuration plus a RAC Licence.
There is absolutely zero PostgreSQ
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:48, Jeff a écrit :
> On Jan 20, 2005, at 9:36 AM, Hervé Piedvache wrote:
> > Sorry but I don't agree with this ... Slony is a replication solution
> > ... I
> > don't need replication ... what will I do when my database will grow
> > up to 50
> > Gb ... I'll need more th
Sorry but I don't agree with this ... Slony is a replication solution ...
I don't need replication ... what will I do when my database will grow up
to 50 Gb ... I'll need more than 50 Gb of RAM on each server ???
This solution is not very realistic for me ...
I need a Cluster solution not a replica
Stephen Frost wrote:
* Herv? Piedvache ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:30, Stephen Frost a écrit :
* Herv? Piedvache ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Is there any solution with PostgreSQL matching these needs ... ?
You might look into pg_pool. Another possi
On Jan 20, 2005, at 9:36 AM, Hervé Piedvache wrote:
Sorry but I don't agree with this ... Slony is a replication solution
... I
don't need replication ... what will I do when my database will grow
up to 50
Gb ... I'll need more than 50 Gb of RAM on each server ???
Slony doesn't use much ram. The
Hervé Piedvache wrote:
Dear community,
My company, which I actually represent, is a fervent user of PostgreSQL.
We used to make all our applications using PostgreSQL for more than 5 years.
We usually do classical client/server applications under Linux, and Web
interface (php, perl, C/C++). We used
* Herv? Piedvache ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:30, Stephen Frost a écrit :
> > * Herv? Piedvache ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > Is there any solution with PostgreSQL matching these needs ... ?
> >
> > You might look into pg_pool. Another possibility would be slony, th
Sorry but I don't agree with this ... Slony is a replication solution ... I
don't need replication ... what will I do when my database will grow up to 50
Gb ... I'll need more than 50 Gb of RAM on each server ???
This solution is not very realistic for me ...
I need a Cluster solution not a repl
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:30, Stephen Frost a écrit :
> * Herv? Piedvache ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Is there any solution with PostgreSQL matching these needs ... ?
>
> You might look into pg_pool. Another possibility would be slony, though
> I'm not sure it's to the point you need it at ye
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:38, Christopher Kings-Lynne a écrit :
> > Sorry but I don't agree with this ... Slony is a replication solution ...
> > I don't need replication ... what will I do when my database will grow up
> > to 50 Gb ... I'll need more than 50 Gb of RAM on each server ???
> > This
Le Jeudi 20 Janvier 2005 15:24, Christopher Kings-Lynne a écrit :
> > Is there any solution with PostgreSQL matching these needs ... ?
>
> You want: http://www.slony.info/
>
> > Do we have to backport our development to MySQL for this kind of problem
> > ? Is there any other solution than a Cluster
* Herv? Piedvache ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Is there any solution with PostgreSQL matching these needs ... ?
You might look into pg_pool. Another possibility would be slony, though
I'm not sure it's to the point you need it at yet, depends on if you can
handle some delay before an insert makes
Is there any solution with PostgreSQL matching these needs ... ?
You want: http://www.slony.info/
Do we have to backport our development to MySQL for this kind of problem ?
Is there any other solution than a Cluster for our problem ?
Well, Slony does replication which is basically what you want :)
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:03:31 +0100, Hervé Piedvache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We were at this moment thinking about a Cluster solution ... We saw on the
> Internet many solution talking about Cluster solution using MySQL ... but
> nothing about PostgreSQL ... the idea is to use several servers
101 - 129 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
