From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: One large v. many small (fwd) |
Date: | 2003-01-31 18:44:00 |
Message-ID: | 200301311044.00583.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Jeff,
> so after a week of engineering and futzing we had things under control..
> (db changes, massive app changes (agressive caching))
>
> Yes it was horrid to throw out RI (which caused some minor issues
> later) but when the business is riding on it.. you make it work any way
> you can. In a perfect world I would have done it another way, but when
> the site is down (read: your business is not running, you are losing large
> amounts of money) you need to put on your fire fighter suit, not your lab
> coat.
Actually, I'd say this is a great example of what I'm advocating. You
started out with a "correct" design, from an RDBMS perspective, and
compromised on it only when the performance issues became insurmountable.
That sounds like a good approach to me.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Don Bowman | 2003-01-31 21:12:38 | not using index for select min(...) |
Previous Message | Jeff | 2003-01-31 18:19:36 | Re: One large v. many small (fwd) |