Re: Is There Any Way ....

From: Ron Peacetree <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Is There Any Way ....
Date: 2005-10-05 17:08:35
Message-ID: 25743727.1128532115286.JavaMail.root@elwamui-chisos.atl.sa.earthlink.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

From: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Sent: Oct 5, 2005 2:16 AM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Is There Any Way ....

>First off, Mr. Trainor's response proves nothing about anyone or
>anything except Mr. Trainor.
>
Fair Enough. I apologize for the inappropriately general statement.


>I'm going to offer an opinion on the caching topic. I don't have
>any benchmarks; I'm offering a general sense of the issue based on
>decades of experience, so I'll give a short summary of that.
>
>I've been earning my living by working with computers since 1972,
>
~1978 for me. So to many on this list, I also would be an "old fart".

<description of qualifications snipped>
>
I've pretty much spent my entire career thinking about and making
advances in RW distributed computing and parallel processing as
first a programmer and then a systems architect.

>Now on to the meat of it.
<excellent and fair handed overall analysis snipped>
>
I agree with your comments just about across the board.

I also agree with the poster(s) who noted that the "TLC factor" and the
2x every 18months pace of increasing HW performance and RAM capacity
make this stuff a moving target.

OTOH, there are some fundamentals that don't seem to change no
matter how far or fast the computing field evolves.

As usual, the proper answers involve finding a sometimes nontrivial
balance between building on known precedent and not being trapped
by doctrine.

Ron

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2005-10-05 17:18:25 Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?
Previous Message Chris Browne 2005-10-05 17:01:04 Re: Ultra-cheap NVRAM device