2009/5/29 Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx>: > > Both Oracle and PostgreSQL have fairly heavy backend processes, and > running hundreds of them on either database is a mistake. Sure, > Oracle can handle more transactions and scales a bit better, but no > one wants to have to buy a 128 way E15K to handle the load rather than > implementing connection pooling. Show me an Oracle server with 5000 > live, active connections and I'll show you a VERY large and expensive > cluster of machines. yes, because for that, oracle has nicer set of features that allows you to create cluster on cheaper machines, instead of buying one ;) But other thing, worth noticing from my own experience is that you have to pay for Oracle so much, just to be able to enjoy it for a bit, people tend to buy better servers. It feels more pro if you have to pay for it. That's the observation from UK, at least. -- GJ -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
