Re: Is PostgreSQL an easy choice for a large CMS?
От | Tony Lausin |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is PostgreSQL an easy choice for a large CMS? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 296cdcaf0604301703y54fccfdcmd6bdb26973e2453d@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Is PostgreSQL an easy choice for a large CMS? ("Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Is PostgreSQL an easy choice for a large CMS?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Ahh. I see the point more clearly now. Perhaps the best strategy for me is to press on with Postgres until the project is at a profitable enough stage to merit a migration to Oracle - should Postgres become an issue. I feel more confident about being able to migrate from Postgres than from MySQL. I am financing this myself. hence the apprehension about the cost. Is there another contender I should think about. On 4/30/06, Matthew T. O'Connor <matthew@zeut.net> wrote: > Tony Lausin wrote: > >> [ rotfl... ] MySQL will fall over under any heavy concurrent-write > >> scenario. It's conceivable that PG won't do what you need either, > >> but if not I'm afraid you're going to be forced into Oracle or one > >> of the other serious-money DBs. > >> > > That's a scary idea - being forced into Oracle or Sybase. Isn't > > Slashdot.org still running strongly off of MySQL? > > Yes Slashdot runs MySQL, however what Tom said was that MySQL will fall > over under any heavy *concurrent-write* scenario. Concurrent-write is > the operative word in that sentence. Slashdot by it's very nature reads > from the database far far more than it writes. The only writes to the > database are things like a new story and user submitted comments, both > of with are small in comparison to the number of reads from the database. > > Matt >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: