Re: Table Partitioning in Postgres:
От | Jonathan Bartlett |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Table Partitioning in Postgres: |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.GSU.4.44.0302190926160.20576-100000@eskimo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Table Partitioning in Postgres: (Greg Copeland <greg@CopelandConsulting.Net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Table Partitioning in Postgres:
|
Список | pgsql-general |
> ignorant on the exact device details. You wouldn't happen to have the > skinny of those things would ya? They still being made? I wish, especially if they are the same price as regular IDE disks and the Linux kernel supports them! > Your comments really serve to enforce that IDE stinks and stresses that > IDE should not be used where serious database performance is needed. > Needless to say, I think we all already understood that. ;) Even more so, it shows the difference between server-clas computer components and consumer-class computer components. It's sometimes wearing on the mind to get the finance guy at my company to understand why a server with the same "specs" (using the term loosely) as a desktop machine costs thousands more. After long discussions extolling the virtues of ECC RAM, redundant hot-swappable power supplies, SCSI hard disks, RAID-1, and cooling requirements, I can sometimes convince him that there is a real reason for the price difference. Jon > > Regards, > > > -- > Greg Copeland <greg@copelandconsulting.net> > Copeland Computer Consulting >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: