Hello, Facing the same situation, I'm considering 3 solutions: - Sharding with postgres_xl (waiting for a Pg10 release) - Sharding with citusdata (Release 7.2, compatible with Pg10 and pg_partman, seems interesting) - Partitioning with PG 10 native partitioning or pg_partman
With colleagues, we have tested the 3 scenarios. Sharding looks interesting, but you have to apprehend its behaviour in case of node loss, or cross-node queries. Thomas 2018-01-29 15:44 GMT+01:00 Melvin Davidson <melvin6...@gmail.com>: > > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 9:34 AM, Matej <gma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Everyone. >> >> We are looking at a rather large fin-tech installation. But as >> scalability requirements are high we look at sharding of-course. >> >> I have looked at many sources for Postgresql sharding, but we are a >> little confused as to shared with schema or databases or both. >> >> >> So far our understanding: >> >> *SCHEMA.* >> >> PROS: >> - seems native to PG >> - backup seems easier >> - connection pooling seems easier, as you can use same connection between >> shard. >> >> CONS: >> - schema changes seems litlle more complicated >> - heard of backup and maintenance problems >> - also some caching problems. >> >> *DATABASE:* >> >> PROS: >> - schema changes litlle easier >> - backup and administration seems more robust >> >> CONS: >> - heard of vacuum problems >> - connection pooling is hard, as 100 shards would mean 100 pools >> >> >> So what is actually the right approach? If anyone could shed some light >> on my issue. >> >> *Thanks* >> >> >> > > *You might also want to consider GridSQL. IIRC it was originally developed > by EnterpriseDB. I saw a demo of it a few years ago and it was quite > impressive, * > *but I've had no interaction with it since, so you will have to judge for > yourself.* > > > *https://sourceforge.net/projects/gridsql/?source=navbar > <https://sourceforge.net/projects/gridsql/?source=navbar>* > > -- > *Melvin Davidson* > I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you > wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you. >
