Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: memcached and PostgreSQL

From: Darcy Buskermolen <darcy(at)wavefire(dot)com>
To: Michael Adler <adler(at)pobox(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: memcached and PostgreSQL
Date: 2004-11-17 17:13:09
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On November 16, 2004 08:00 pm, Michael Adler wrote:
> 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.

Have a look at the pdf presentation found on the following site:

> -Mike
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Darcy Buskermolen
Wavefire Technologies Corp.
ph: 250.717.0200
fx:  250.763.1759

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Hervé PiedvacheDate: 2004-11-17 17:16:10
Subject: Re: Tsearch2 really slower than ilike ?
Previous:From: Matthew T. O'ConnorDate: 2004-11-17 16:41:10
Subject: Re: query plan question

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group