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

Re: how good is PostgreSQL

From: Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net>
To: Steve Wolfe <steve(at)iboats(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: how good is PostgreSQL
Date: 2000-11-02 19:14:16
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
Performance depends on a lot of factors.  Shelling out $$$ for Sun
hardware doesn't garuntee good performance.  They might have been better
off buying a Tru64 system with Compaq's jdk.

Steve Wolfe wrote:
> > d) PHP may not be a great choice.  It doesn't provide a lot of hooks
> >    for effective caching of database connections and/or results.
> >    mod_perl or Java servlets may be better, depending on the details.
>   One of our competitors spent a very, very large deal of money on high-end
> Sun equipment, so that they could write their CGI stuff in Java servlets.
> It still ran slow.  We run Perl on machines that pale compared to theirs,
> and get far better performance. : )
> steve

Joseph Shraibman
Increase signal to noise ratio.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2000-11-02 19:14:36
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-11-02 18:56:29
Subject: Re: Re: [GENERAL] Query caching

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Lamar OwenDate: 2000-11-02 19:22:19
Subject: Re: Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)
Previous:From: Nathan SudermanDate: 2000-11-02 19:05:41
Subject: the List! the List

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