Re: DICE News Article Comment

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Joshua Kramer <joskra42(dot)list(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: DICE News Article Comment
Date: 2015-03-23 00:59:10
Message-ID: CAB7nPqRqbk+vnwFf3WCrhdKfBPCi1qRKhBNyWUuKNzmiu+De_w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Joshua Kramer <joskra42(dot)list(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Did anyone catch this comment?
>
> http://news.dice.com/2015/03/19/why-i-choose-postgresql-over-mysqlmariadb/#comment-2638712
>
> Given the stories I've heard about Postgres working well in that type of
> application, I'm wondering what out-of-the-ordinary thing that application
> did to cause Postgres to lock up as he said it did.

This comment does not mention the version used, but it mentions the
JSON features of a "couple of months back", so I would guess that they
tried with 9.4.0 and jsonb. Now I recall as well the following bug:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140731233051.GN17765@andrew-ThinkPad-X230

And it has been fixed by Alvaro here, included in 9.4.1:
commit: 0e3a1f71dfb31527c07a80ccba815b2928d70d8f
author: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 13:52:27 -0300
Grab heavyweight tuple lock only before sleeping

So perhaps it was the problem they faced?
Regards,
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Flower 2015-03-23 01:06:00 Re: DICE News Article Comment
Previous Message Joshua Kramer 2015-03-23 00:49:03 DICE News Article Comment