From: | Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail(at)webthatworks(dot)it> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: postgre vs MySQL |
Date: | 2008-03-14 12:22:34 |
Message-ID: | 20080314132234.702e6617@webthatworks.it |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:28:37 +0100
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> > I still find impressing that Google uses MySQL... I can guess why,
> What makes you so sure Google don't use PostgreSQL *as well*?
I'm not sure... in fact I never excluded they could use pg for other
stuff... They may use it for collecting payment, counting # of
ads/click trough etc...
> (hint: we don't force them to tell you about it...)
So... MySQL forced Google to tell everyone?
I think the field of application is pretty different.
I'm speculating...
They should have a "narrow" task, they shouldn't be interested in
coherency/integrity... just on HA etc...
Still I'd be curious to know if people can scale pg to several
hundreds(?) machines without loosing the features that differentiate
it from other DB...
--
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
http://www.webthatworks.it
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-03-14 12:41:27 | Re: Reindex does not finish 8.2.6 |
Previous Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2008-03-14 12:20:41 | Re: Blobs |