Re: Why facebook used mysql ?
От | Scott Marlowe |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why facebook used mysql ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTingEjp3T_fx=q+p2F6gQO4GKhMcrLwtJZ012P4x@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why facebook used mysql ? (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> wrote: > Postgres 7.2 brought non blocking vacuum. Before that, you could > pretty much write off any 24x7 duty applications -- dealing with dead > tuples was just too much of a headache. Amen! I remember watching vacuum run alongside other queries and getting all school-girl giggly over it. Seriously it was a big big change for pgsql. > The mysql of the time, 3.23, > was fast but locky and utterly unsafe. True, it was common to see mysql back then just stop, dead. Go to bring it back up and have to repair tables. > Postgres has been relatively disadvantaged in terms of administrative > overhead which is a bigger deal than sql features, replication, > performance, etc for high load website type cases. I would say it's a bigger problem for adoption than for high load sites. If Joe User spends an hour a day keeping his database on his workstation happy, he's probably not happy. If Joe Admin spends an hour a day keeping his 100 machine db farm happy, he's probably REALLY happy that it only takes so long.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: