On Wed, 2003-05-28 at 15:09, Jon Pounder wrote: > I'll save my typing fingers somewhat on this one - you are doing great > arguing about all the crappiness of mysql and actually backing it up with > real examples. It is nice to see that for a change in comparison to all the > mysql lovers that love it just "because" but have no basis to compare it to > something with "heavy" load. I, like you don't consider massive amounts of > selects heavy at all. > > My example of heavy load where mysql could not even begin to handle the > situation was a project with real time stock market data streamed in as > bids and offers and trades happened, statistics computed from that in real > time, database kept in sync live, and charts and graphs plotted in real > time for users on the site. Now that situation had more than its share of > inserts and updates, and a massive wad of historical data being kept just > to add to the fun. > > Might I add for record that postgres did just fine.
While I'm on the postgres bandwagon for now, I wouldn't want it in the middle of a phone system doing heavy call loads either. Postgres also has some downsides too. As I understand it, postgres doesn't understand prepared statements, or at least it doesn't via the perl DBI. Regardless I've seen our postgres database eat +2600 updates in under 2 seconds from a remote host on the same exact hardware that mysql choked on and not cause any degredation of access times for any other user. -- Steven Critchfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users