Thread: PostgreSQL scaleability question
Hi All,
I have been using PostgreSQL for my project repository, because it is free and easy to use. My manager is trying to decide if he should use a commerical database such as Oracle or PostgreSQL for a gaint information repository for the corporate. He asked me what is the scaleability on PostgreSQL. I don't have the answer. So far, I have been very pleased with PostgreSQL, but I'm only using it for my project.
Does anyone have any information on this? Has anyone done any comparsions?
Many thanks in advance!
Mary Wang
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when mary.y.wang@boeing.com ("Wang, Mary Y") would write:
> I have been using PostgreSQL for my project repository, because it
> is free and easy to use. My manager is trying to decide if he
> should use a commerical database such as Oracle or PostgreSQL for a
> gaint information repository for the corporate. He asked me what is
> the scaleability on PostgreSQL. I don't have the answer. So far, I
> have been very pleased with PostgreSQL, but I'm only using it for my
> project.
>
> Does anyone have any information on this? Has anyone done any
> comparsions?
It is very difficult to evaluate such things absent of actually doing
simulations of the kind of load you intend to put on your systems.
When evaluating the performance of complex client/server systems, the
devil truly is in the details. You can't be certain of what the
actual bottlenecks will be without having a pretty realistic
simulation of the "production" environment.
After all...
- Your production environment is different from mine.
- Your application is different from mine.
Those factors prevent it from being particularly useful to pretend
that the results I get are in any way useful for you.
--
(reverse (concatenate 'string "moc.liamg" "@" "enworbbc"))
http://linuxdatabases.info/info/slony.html
It isn't that physicists enjoy physics more than they enjoy sex, its
that they enjoy sex more when they are thinking of physics.
Christopher Browne wrote:
>Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when mary.y.wang@boeing.com ("Wang, Mary Y") would write:
>
>
>>I have been using PostgreSQL for my project repository, because it
>>is free and easy to use. My manager is trying to decide if he
>>should use a commerical database such as Oracle or PostgreSQL for a
>>gaint information repository for the corporate. He asked me what is
>>the scaleability on PostgreSQL. I don't have the answer. So far, I
>>have been very pleased with PostgreSQL, but I'm only using it for my
>>project.
>>
>>Does anyone have any information on this? Has anyone done any
>>comparsions?
>>
>>
>
>It is very difficult to evaluate such things absent of actually doing
>simulations of the kind of load you intend to put on your systems.
>
That said, there are lots of people running extremely large data
repositories with PostgreSQL, if you search the archives you can
probably find some examples.
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Wang, Mary Y wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have been using PostgreSQL for my project repository, because it is
> free and easy to use. My manager is trying to decide if he should use a
> commerical database such as Oracle or PostgreSQL for a gaint information
> repository for the corporate. He asked me what is the scaleability on
> PostgreSQL. I don't have the answer. So far, I have been very pleased
> with PostgreSQL, but I'm only using it for my project.
Please define scalability.
If you mean "database size", well I think you're going to hit hardware
limitations much sooner than software ones. I strogly suggest you
go for 64bit SMP (Opterons), with tons of RAM and strong and
reliable disk I/O. And suitable backup system. Of course you should
have both a production and a testing box, as a minumum. I'm stressing
this (I'm sure you know already) only to pointing out that "money"
isn't a key factor in software selection. It's much harder to buy
scalable hardware than scalable software.
If you mean "load" (many clients, many queries per second), that
depends entirely on your specific needs. In my experience, load
problems originate from bad or too naive programming. That is, bad
applications. And there's little you can do on the database server
side to prevent that. Even with Oracle. And again, any software
performance issue can be turned into a hardware issue.
IMHO, the key is support. Is your company willing (and able) to sue your
Oracle dealer or Oracle itself, should you run into troubles with
their software? Try and have a salesman offer you a licence agreement
that allows that.
If not, what are the advantages of commercial software? Calling
support lines and "hoping for the best" isn't much different from
posting to a mailing list and still hoping for the best.
If you do have the money, considering time and expenses in such a legal
action, you're also able hire tens of programmers only to fix the bug
in the database. You know, with PostgreSQL, you have the source.
One advantage of commercial software is psychological: it's much easier
to convince your boss pay 50,000$ in hardware if your company is
already paying similar figures in software. That is, companies are
more willing to pay $100,000 50% hardware and 50% software than
$50,000 100% hardware, to solve the same problem.
.TM.
--
____/ ____/ /
/ / / Marco Colombo
___/ ___ / / Technical Manager
/ / / ESI s.r.l.
_____/ _____/ _/ Colombo@ESI.it