2010/11/9 Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Vick Khera <vivek@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Also, my understanding is that if you go way back on the PostgreSQL timeline to versions 6 and earliest 7.x, it was a little shaky. (I started with 7.3 or 7.4, and it has been rock solid.) > >> In those same times, mysql was also, um, other than rock solid. > > I don't have enough operational experience with mysql to speak to how > reliable it was back in the day. What it *did* have over postgres back > then was speed. It was a whole lot faster, particularly on the sort of > single-stream-of-simple-queries cases that people who don't know > databases are likely to set up as benchmarks. (mysql still beats us on > cases like that, though not by as much.) I think that drove quite a > few early adoption decisions, and now folks are locked in; the cost of > conversion outweighs the (perceived) benefits. Facebook have writen "Flashcache [is] built primarily as a block cache for InnoDB but is general purpose and can be used by other applications as well." https://github.com/facebook/flashcache/ A good tool by the way. It is the only place where I like to see SSD disk. (not at facebook, but with 'volatile' data) > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general > -- Cédric Villemain 2ndQuadrant http://2ndQuadrant.fr/ ; PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
