On Apr 6, 2006, at 11:23 AM, Nick Barker wrote:
The question is how wide are your rows and how well do you index.
Personally I find this the biggest issue on speed with any database.
Good luck finding someone that has 100 million records. I cannot help
you there.
Craigslist has 100,000,000 rows in their archive database. They list
it in this case study: http://www.mysql.com/it-resources/case-
studies/mysql-craigslist-casestudy.pdf
-Blake
On 4/6/06, Jason Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I recently got hired as the resident Linux-Geek for a new company
headed by
a guy who has created 5 of the fortune 500 companies. My co-
worker (we'll
call Fred) recently got hired as well.... Fred has 9 years of MS-
SQL DBA
experience.
We have a situation where we're using MySQL 5.0 and are only
dealing with
very limited, read "around 100Megs" amounts of data which will
surely grow
to more than 100 million rows of data shortly.
Fred is luckily open-minded enough to accept the fact that MySQL
($0.00)
is better than MS-SQL ($15,000.00) at the current time due to our
lack of
data. However.... He's pretty convinced that this is surely not
going to
be the case when the data grows.
Fred has concrete evidence of his ability to handle more than 100
million
rows of data per table with MS-SQL with little to no loss of speed.
I'm dead set on keeping my OSS databases, but am having a hard
time finding
concrete evidence that either Postgres OR MySQL can handle more
than 100
million rows of data per table without suffering speed hits.
Can anyone here point me to something, somewhere that gives
numbers on any
OSS datbase handling that amount of data and maintaining good
numbers on
speed, with possible hints as to its configuration?
I've personally never handled any OSS db with more than a couple
hundred
thousand rows TOTAL, (but have around 3 years exp. handling many
various
smaller dbs) and am kind of twitchy about what's going to happen
with our db
as it grows exponentially to hundreds of millions of rows.
Hardware is not an issue. Disk space is not an issue. The only
issue is
whether MySQL (or PostgreSQL) can be properly configured to handle
hundreds
of millions of rows per table without hacking it into some
slashdot-esque
frankenstein configuration.
Any takers for this one? I'm kind of scared I'm going to lose the
CEO on
this battle and switch to MS-SQL.... I'm dealing with a guy who is
extremely
competent in MS-SQL and has demonstrated abilities to handle any
amount of
data. If I can demonstrate the same ability with an OSS solution,
I'm sure
I'll win and keep the OSS solution, due to the obvious financial
advantages.
Thanks anyone who points me to any helpful information.
--Jason
PS - I have a pretty good amount of experience with MySQL, but am
certain
PostgreSQL is just as good. If information can be given about
*any* OSS db
solution, I'd be most grateful. Thank you.
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
--
Nick Barker
785-3824
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
