4 ms·
Why wouldn't 100GB tables be in a single machine? It's not that much data. I'm comfortably running a 3TB table on PostgreSQL, which is growing at a rate of abou
by fgonzag 9y ago
Why wouldn't 100GB tables be in a single machine? It's not that much data. I'm comfortably running a 3TB table on PostgreSQL, which is growing at a rate of about 75GB a month.
The machine isn't even that beefy, 128 GB of RAM, dual mid range Xeons, and prosumer SSDs in RAID 10. I would rather spend money in PCI-E SSDs, 300+ GB of RAM, and high end CPUs if it meant I didn't have to implement sharding at an application level.