From: | Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL versus MySQL for GPS Data |
Date: | 2009-03-18 15:49:02 |
Message-ID: | 87zlfiltld.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general |
juankarlos(dot)openggd(at)gmail(dot)com (Juan Pereira) writes:
> Quite interesting! The main reason why we thought using a table per
> truck was because concurrent load: if there are 100 trucks trying to
> write in the same table, maybe the performance is worse than having
> 100 tables, due to the fact that the table is blocked for other
> queries while the writing process is running, isn't it?
You're assuming something that is distinctly Not True of PostgreSQL.
You do NOT require an exclusive lock on a table in order to write to
it.
For writes to tables to acquire an exclusive lock on the table happens
to be a specific feature of the MySQL(tm) storage engine called
MyISAM.
--
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="linuxdatabases.info" in name ^ "@" ^ tld;;
http://linuxfinances.info/info/spreadsheets.html
Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Selena Deckelmann | 2009-03-18 16:42:32 | Fwd: PostgreSQL info for TDWI chapter meeting? |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2009-03-18 12:00:35 | Re: PostgreSQL versus MySQL for GPS Data |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2009-03-18 15:54:20 | Re: sql transaction |
Previous Message | DM | 2009-03-18 15:18:51 | Re: max_fsm_relations and max_fsm_pages problem |