Re: Time to put theory to the test?
От | Kenneth Marshall |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Time to put theory to the test? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20110426170421.GD23895@aart.is.rice.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Time to put theory to the test? ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 09:58:49AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote: > J Sisson <sisson.j@gmail.com> wrote: > > Rob Wultsch <wultsch@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Tip from someone that manages thousands of MySQL servers: Use > >> InnoDB when using MySQL. > > > > Granted, my knowledge of PostgreSQL (and even MSSQL) far surpasses > > my knowledge of MySQL, but if InnoDB has such amazing benefits as > > being crash safe, and even speed increases in some instances, why > > isn't InnoDB default? > > Because it's not as fast as the unsafe ISAM implementation for most > benchmarks. > > There is one minor gotcha in InnoDB (unless it's been fixed since > 2008): the release of locks is not atomic with the persistence of > the data in the write-ahead log (which makes it S2PL but not SS2PL). > So it is possible for another connection to see data that won't be > there after crash recovery. This is justified as an optimization. > Personally, I would prefer not to see data from other transactions > until it has actually been successfully committed. > > -Kevin > In addition, their fulltext indexing only works with MyISAM tables. Ken
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: