-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Ryan Chan wrote: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Jona Christopher Sahnwaldt > <[email protected]> wrote: >> With the indexes defined in tables.sql, query performance >> is ok. For example, selecting the titles of all articles that >> are not redirects takes five or ten minutes (didn't profile it >> exactly). >> > > Any reason I would like to ask is why not use PostgreSQL? > > Seems MySQL is not suitable for handling large table (e.g. over few > GB), I just wonder why wikipedia don't use PostgreSQL? > > It should provide better performance. >
MediaWiki has used MySQL since the beginning and has let the code get away with things that shouldn't have been done which makes switching to Postgres hard. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEAREIAAYFAksHZv0ACgkQ69PBoSWyJd7JeACfVxxq+t4GyWzAGX3BSMxh80da GSgAoINjp9zKszTUfnEm+RM2ORJpyMjZ =cWa5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
