Re: Options for growth
| От | Andrew Sullivan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Options for growth |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20030124170139.U32645@mail.libertyrms.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Options for growth (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 12:23:52PM -0500, Neil Conway wrote: > > The estimates I've heard from a couple parties are that PostgreSQL tends > to scale well up to 4 CPUs. I've been meaning to take a look at > improving that, but I haven't had a chance yet... I can definitely tell you that Postgres scales _fine_ beyond 4 processors. Indeed, we have found under some loads that 4 processors is not enough; but when we put it into an 8- or more-way box, it is much faster. That's on Solaris, though, which is generally very good at handling greater-than-4 CPUs. That's why Solaris is a good platform for us, even though its fork() times rot. > think the cost of subsidizing some of that development would be a > fraction of the license fees you'll end up paying Oracle over the > years... And it's worth pointing out what those ORAC licenses really cost: it might be as little as the savings of a single year. By the way ORAC may not be _quite_ as bulletproof as it seems. It shares file areas, and there are rumours of locking troubles that people trip over. Nothing they'll share with you, of course: the license forbids as much. But if you ask someone over the top of a glass, he or she might tell you about it. A -- ---- Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada <andrew@libertyrms.info> M2P 2A8 +1 416 646 3304 x110
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: