On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 6:47 PM, Glen Eustace <geustace@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Generally speaking, virtualization allows you to take a bunch of low >> powered servers and make them live in one big box saving money on >> electricity and management. Generally speaking, database sers are big >> powerful boxes with lots of hard disks and gigs upon gigs of ram to >> handle terabytes of data. Those two things seem at odds to me. > > If one is handling databases with Terabytes of data and 1000s of > connections, I would agree. We will be looking at 100s of Megabytes max and > possible several hundred connections. A much smaller workload. Yeah, you're not really looking at heavy lifting here then. Should be fine. > >> What, exactly, as you looking to gain by running pgsql under vmware on >> such hardware? > > Mobility, in the HA/DR sense. Being able to vmotion the server while it is > running to rectify hardware issues or perform upgrades. To bring the server > up at a DR site automagically using SRM. And yes, we have still to > investigate the whole crash consistency stuff with SRM. This database is > heavily biased toward reads rather than writes. Given the light load you're looking at running, you'll likely be ok as long as there aren't any issues with crash recovery. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
