4 ms·
I evaluated this heavily but had to backoff because scale is limited to a single machine. Really eager for their clustering solution.
by dominotw 8y ago
I evaluated this heavily but had to backoff because scale is limited to a single machine. Really eager for their clustering solution.
- RobAtticus 8y agoSorry to hear, though I'd like to mention that there is a fair amount of scale you can get out of a single TimescaleDB node. We scale with disk space so you can throw more disks at it; we have production users who are in the hundreds of billions of rows and 10s of TB of data on a single node. Also with support for streaming replication you can spread out your read load and get HA support. But yes, we will have more to say in the coming months about clustering though.
- grumpydba 8y agoHi, are the upcoming clustering efforts developed with the intent to be mainlined in postgresql ? Indeed some way to automatically failover/failback (ie automate pg_rewind) without all the keepalived/pacemaker/haproxy/patroni stuff is really needed.
- jason_slack 8y agoWhat were the specs of the machine you were using?