Re: White paper on very big databases
| От | Jonah H. Harris |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: White paper on very big databases |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 36e682920902041823l1fadd2afnfd0e0206121638a4@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: White paper on very big databases ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: White paper on very big databases
Re: White paper on very big databases Re: White paper on very big databases Re: White paper on very big databases |
| Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
IIRC, EnterpriseDB had one customer with over 1TB of data, but they too would have been hush-hush about it. When I was consulting, I saw very few Postgres databases at or over 1TB. While Postgres can handle fairly large data sets, it lacks some fairly important VLDB features which is probably why there are so few people with multi-terabyte PG databases. Perhaps JD/Fetter know of more, but I can count the ones I know of at < 10.
Well therein lies the problem. CMD has a customer with a multi-terrabyte
table (not including the rest of the database) but we can't really talk
about it :(
IIRC, EnterpriseDB had one customer with over 1TB of data, but they too would have been hush-hush about it. When I was consulting, I saw very few Postgres databases at or over 1TB. While Postgres can handle fairly large data sets, it lacks some fairly important VLDB features which is probably why there are so few people with multi-terabyte PG databases. Perhaps JD/Fetter know of more, but I can count the ones I know of at < 10.
--
Jonah H. Harris, Senior DBA
myYearbook.com
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: