| From: | PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Dave Page" <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Alexander Staubo" <alex(at)purefiction(dot)net>, "Scott Ribe" <scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com>, "Naz Gassiep" <naz(at)mira(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Integrity on large sites |
| Date: | 2007-05-24 16:28:29 |
| Message-ID: | op.tsuaprtbcigqcu@apollo13 |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Flickr uses InnoDB, by the way.
On Thu, 24 May 2007 18:07:21 +0200, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>
>>> problem with your setup. Granted, MySQL is a pretty bad database, but
>>> it's not *that* bad -- your example implies that heavily MyISAM-based
>>> (you don't say whether this is MyISAM or InnoDB) sites such as
>>> Slashdot and Flickr should be falling over every hour.
>> I'm not going to comment on who's fault it is, but the OP quoted 100
>> updates and 600 selects per *second*. I can't imagine Flickr or Slashdot
>> (which is heavily csched for reading) are under anything like that sort
>> of constant load.
>
> Uhmmm.... I would not be surprised at *all* at slashdot or flickr doing
> that type of velocity. We have customers right now that under peak are
> doing 10 times that and yes these are customers that have similar types
> of websites.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2007-05-24 17:08:50 | Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS |
| Previous Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2007-05-24 16:22:04 | Re: Postgresql 8.2.4 crash with tsearch2 |