From: | Jeff Davis <list-pgsql-general(at)empires(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PHP + PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2002-09-20 10:54:15 |
Message-ID: | 200209200354.15216.list-pgsql-general@empires.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Good:
* postgres is really good for concurrent accesses (in part because of it's
better-than-row-level-locking)
* postgres is stable. I don't think I've heard of many non-hardware crashes
for a while now
* php has good support for postgres
* good feature set, won't hold you back
* good with a huge amount of data, and/or many table joins
Bad:
* no replication (I suppose if you really need it, there are replication
soultions, but maybe not as good as oracle or db2), which means if you're
talking intense queries, you'll need to get a really big box that can handle
all those requests by itself.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
On Thursday 19 September 2002 09:52 am, Elielson Fontanezi wrote:
> Hi everybody!
>
> I doing a research about Apache Web Server + PHP + PostgreSQL. If it is
> reliable or not. The pros and set backs about it.
> From you what do you have to tell me about it?
>
> ..............................................
> A Question...
> Since before your sun burned hot in space
> and before your race was born,
> I have awaited a question.
>
> Elielson Fontanezi
> DBA Technical Support - PRODAM
> Parque do Ibirapuera s/n - SP - BRAZIL
> +55 11 5080 9493
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Lehuta | 2002-09-20 12:30:08 | timestamp parse error |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2002-09-20 10:47:25 | Re: missed features and unhappy changes when pg 7.1->7.2 |