On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 15:44, Erik Jones wrote: > Scott Marlowe wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 15:04, Mikael Carneholm wrote: > > > >> This link adds to the joy... > >> > >> http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?25,93181,93181 > >> > >> So the most popular free "database" in the world is a lousy performing > >> product that accepts 'gabba gabba hey' as a valid timestamp. Someone > >> please, give me a reason not to get cynical... > >> > > > > Oh man, that poor guy. He's got 4 or 5 machines in a cluster, and he's > > still not catching up to the one machine postgresql server. > > > > And he's switching because he wants better reliability? > > > > Guess he's never heard of pgpool, slony, mammoth replicator, cjdbc, or a > > half dozen other ways to get high reliability with postgresql. > > > > I wonder what version of postgresql he was testing. > > > Please, remove pgpool from your list of "reliable" postgresql tools. > It's decent, but child procs tend to go zombie from time to time. No, I don't think I will. I've used it and tested it quite thoroughly, and have never had that happen. Bad hardware on your end maybe? Or an older version, or a bad compiler? I've found it to be very stable and reliable. If you've got a reproduceable test case I'm sure Tatsuo (sp) would love to see it.
