From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Perfomance Tuning |
Date: | 2003-08-14 21:51:51 |
Message-ID: | 200308142151.h7ELppX12599@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Christopher Browne wrote:
> threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org (Jeff) writes:
> > On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >> As I have said elsewhere, Informix is probably a poor database to emulate
> >> since they are effectively an old dead-end fork of the Ingres/Postgres code,
> >> and have already been "mined" for most of the improvements they made.
> >>
> > With informix 7.0 they rewrote the entire thing from the ground up
> > to remove a bunch of limitations and build a multithreaded engine.
> > so it isn't so much an old fork anymore.
>
> No, I think you misunderstand the intent...
>
> The pre-7.0 version was based on Informix's B-Tree libraries, and the
> file structuring actually bears a marked resemblance to that of MySQL
> (that's an observation; neither forcibly a good or a bad thing), where
> there's a data file for the table, and then a bunch of index files,
> named somewhat after the table.
>
> In the 7.0-and-after era, they added in the "old dead-end fork of the
> Ingres/Postgres code" to get the "Universal Data Server."
I think 9.0 was the the Ingres/Postgres code, not 7.X.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-08-15 00:17:50 | Re: 7.4 beta 1 getting out of swap |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-08-14 21:47:01 | Re: Perfomance Tuning |