That's what I'm telling to them, but they want proven results in other
companies, but I'll manage it.
Thanks for your reply and information.
Best regards.
On Nov 27, 2007 2:12 AM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> That's actually pretty small. Where I work we have a data warehouse
> of similar design (a few large tables, a few small lookup tables). It
> has 86,840,447 rows and takes up 44 Gigs of space. It sits on a
> single CPU box with a 4 disk RAID-10 and runs queries covering a few
> minutes to a few days worth of monitoring data. Sequential scanning
> the whole main table takes 621 seconds or so (10+ minutes). We add
> 150 to 200k rows a day to it.
>
> Selecting a days's worth of data takes ~ 350ms. A week's worth takes
> 2 to 10 seconds depending on how much is cached.
>
> This is a small database for either oracle or postgresql. Talk your
> bosses into giving postgresql a try if you can. You should be able to
> build a 20million test database in an afternoon or so, so it's not
> like you'll be dedicating thousands of man hours to test it.
>
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
