memcached and PostgreSQL

From: Michael Adler <adler(at)pobox(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: memcached and PostgreSQL
Date: 2004-11-17 04:00:24
Message-ID: 20041117040024.GB8838@pobox.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

http://pugs.postgresql.org/sfpug/archives/000021.html

I noticed that some of you left coasters were talking about memcached
and pgsql. I'm curious to know what was discussed.

In reading about memcached, it seems that many people are using it to
circumvent the scalability problems of MySQL (lack of MVCC).

from their site:

<snip>
Shouldn't the database do this?

Regardless of what database you use (MS-SQL, Oracle, Postgres,
MysQL-InnoDB, etc..), there's a lot of overhead in implementing ACID
properties in a RDBMS, especially when disks are involved, which means
queries are going to block. For databases that aren't ACID-compliant
(like MySQL-MyISAM), that overhead doesn't exist, but reading threads
block on the writing threads. memcached never blocks.
</snip>

So What does memcached offer pgsql users? It would still seem to offer
the benefit of a multi-machined cache.

-Mike

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Russell Smith 2004-11-17 04:35:42 Re: query plan question
Previous Message David Parker 2004-11-17 03:54:51 query plan question