| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mikael Carneholm <Mikael(dot)Carneholm(at)WirelessCar(dot)com>, "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)tocr(dot)com>, David Goodenough <david(dot)goodenough(at)btconnect(dot)com>, pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance figures from DbMail list |
| Date: | 2006-12-08 23:49:42 |
| Message-ID: | 1165621782.11083.14.camel@dogma.v10.wvs |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 16:23 -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > To be fair, he was running the cluster on a 100Mbps network. Depending
> > on his setup, that may have been his bottleneck. However, there's a good
> > chance that's not his only problem. Especially if he's so sold on MySQL
> > Cluster that he's trying to find a place to use it.
>
> No, read on, he upgraded to gigabit halfway through the thread, and went
> from 50 to 70 tps.
>
Wow, that's bad. This debunks the myth that native replication is
inherently easier to use or inherently better in some way. They spent a
whole thread talking about it, and still couldn't get half the
performance of a single PG box.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-08 23:59:54 | Re: Marking indexes out of date (WAS: loading data, creating indexes, clustering, vacuum) feature request? |
| Previous Message | developer | 2006-12-08 23:28:10 | character varying length |