Re: Which SQL is the best for servers?
От | Marten Kemp |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Which SQL is the best for servers? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | hpSdnczRWLIGmwfUnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@earthlink.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Список | pgsql-general |
hpuxrac wrote: > On Feb 16, 1:09 am, pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote: >> I am involved with a SQL server project. The server would be used in a >> very heavy duty environment, with hundreds of thousands, if not >> millions of database enquiries per minutes. >> >> The server would run Linux or one of the BSD variant, with at least >> 32GB of RAM. We are not very certain of the hardware specs yet because >> we haven't decided on which SQL to use. >> >> I know that Oracle, MySQL and PostgreSQL are all designed for heavy >> duty uses. >> >> And I checked all available online resources for a SQL comparison and >> all I could find is some articles dated 2005 or so ! >> >> So, here's my questions: >> >> 1. Are there any recent SQL comparison article available? >> >> 2. Since the server may come with only 32GB of RAM, which SQL can run >> the "leanest" - that is, not a memory hog? >> >> 3. The server might also become a web-server, which SQL can tie itself >> to the Web-based enquiry they best? >> >> Please give me your suggestion / opinion. Thank you !! > > Hundreds of thousands or millions of queries per minute on 1 32 gig > server? > > Sounds pretty unlikely. > > Oracle or DB2 are probably the only 2 viable choices but it doesn't > sound like a good plan from the get go. For that possible transaction rate I'd suggest something other than an x86-based server; an entry-level zSeries running zVM and multiple instances of Linux-for-zSeries comes to mind. -- -- Marten Kemp (Fix name and ISP to reply)
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: