| From: | Ben Chobot <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Redis 16 times faster than Postgres? |
| Date: | 2019-09-30 03:52:10 |
| Message-ID: | 53446CE1-5E1D-4A1A-A56C-FBBAB0B250F5@silentmedia.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sep 29, 2019, at 8:44 PM, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 9/29/19 8:09 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:46:14 +1000
>> Nathan Woodrow <madmanwoo(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>> Redis is a in memory database so I would except it to be always much
>>> faster..
>> Is there a way to have Redis periodically update an on-disk backup?
>> That would be great, but otherwise you're at the mercy of your power
>> company (here in Central Florida it's routine for power to go down and
>> stay down for five hours).
>
> It would be criminal for it not to have an async writer process flushing modified pages to disk. And to not have a UPS that you've tested.
It's perfectly reasonable to use Redis as a caching layer without any persistence at all. In such cases, flushing state to disk is a waste of resources.
(For other use cases, yes, Redis allows you to flush state to disk.)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2019-09-30 05:37:48 | Re: Possible bug: SQL function parameter in window frame definition |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-09-30 03:48:10 | Re: Redis 16 times faster than Postgres? |