On November 16, 2004 08:00 pm, Michael Adler wrote: > http://pugs.postgresql.org/sfpug/archives/000021.html > > I noticed that some of you left coasters were talking about memcached > and pgsql. I'm curious to know what was discussed. > > In reading about memcached, it seems that many people are using it to > circumvent the scalability problems of MySQL (lack of MVCC). > > from their site: > > <snip> > Shouldn't the database do this? > > Regardless of what database you use (MS-SQL, Oracle, Postgres, > MysQL-InnoDB, etc..), there's a lot of overhead in implementing ACID > properties in a RDBMS, especially when disks are involved, which means > queries are going to block. For databases that aren't ACID-compliant > (like MySQL-MyISAM), that overhead doesn't exist, but reading threads > block on the writing threads. memcached never blocks. > </snip> > > So What does memcached offer pgsql users? It would still seem to offer > the benefit of a multi-machined cache. Have a look at the pdf presentation found on the following site: http://people.freebsd.org/~seanc/pgmemcache/ > > -Mike > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings -- Darcy Buskermolen Wavefire Technologies Corp. ph: 250.717.0200 fx: 250.763.1759 http://www.wavefire.com
