Re: how good is PostgreSQL

Steve Wolfe wrote:
>
> > Even after that, you have a long way to go before you will hit 1000
> > transactions per second from any SQL database.

>    I guess they could always buy a few Sun E10000's on the backend, and a
> large room of rack-mountable PC's for web/CGI serving.  Nothing like
> plopping down ten or twenty million dollars on hardware. : )

Or they could buy a single IBM S/390, run Linux/390 and PostgreSQL on
that. Probably would cost less, and be more reliable.  And they can
always load another Linux/390 VM -- an S/390 can run something like
41,000 virtual machines each running Linux/390 and Apache.

However, if you want to see the architecture of a _large_
database-backed website, see the story behind Digital City at
www.aolserver.com.  While they're using Sybase instead of PostgreSQL,
the architecture is the same.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11