On 07/01/2012 01:00 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
Considering I can build a pgsql 8.4 machine with 256G RAM and 64
Opteron cores and a handful of SSDs or HW RAID that can do REAL 7k to
8k RW TPS right now for well under $10k, 20k TPS on an in memory
database isn't all that impressive.
Again, their
It sounds like a lot of marketing BS :)
But I like the fact that they use modern language like C++. It is a
pain to try doing any development on postgresql. Transition to c++
would be nice (I know it's been debated on #hackers a looot).
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list
On 06/25/2012 01:23 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Craig Jamescja...@emolecules.com wrote:
It claims to be the world's fastest database.
[link where they boast of 80,000 tps read-only]
20,000 tps? Didn't we hit well over 300,000 tps in read-only
benchmarks of PostgreSQL with some of the 9.2
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 06/25/2012 01:23 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Craig Jamescja...@emolecules.com wrote:
It claims to be the world's fastest database.
[link where they boast of 80,000 tps read-only]
20,000 tps? Didn't we hit well
Any thoughts about this? It seems to be a new database system designed
from scratch to take advantage of the growth in RAM size (data sets that
fit in memory) and the availability of SSD drives. It claims to be the
world's fastest database.
On 06/25/2012 11:25 AM, Craig James wrote:
Any thoughts about this? It seems to be a new database system designed
from scratch to take advantage of the growth in RAM size (data sets that
fit in memory) and the availability of SSD drives. It claims to be the
world's fastest database.
I
Craig James cja...@emolecules.com wrote:
It claims to be the world's fastest database.
[link where they boast of 80,000 tps read-only]
20,000 tps? Didn't we hit well over 300,000 tps in read-only
benchmarks of PostgreSQL with some of the 9.2 performance
enhancements?
-Kevin
--
Sent
On 6/25/12 10:23 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Craig James cja...@emolecules.com wrote:
It claims to be the world's fastest database.
[link where they boast of 80,000 tps read-only]
20,000 tps? Didn't we hit well over 300,000 tps in read-only
benchmarks of PostgreSQL with some of the
Original message
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:03:10 -0500
From: pgsql-performance-ow...@postgresql.org (on behalf of Shaun Thomas
stho...@optionshouse.com)
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] MemSQL the world's fastest database?
To: Craig James cja...@emolecules.com
Cc: pgsql-performance
gnuo...@rcn.com writes:
Then there's this from the article:
The key ideas are that SQL code is translated into C++, so avoiding the
need to use a slow SQL interpreter, and that the data is kept in memory,
with disk read/writes taking place in the background.
Besides the nonsense
10 matches
Mail list logo
