| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrej Ricnik-Bay <andrej(dot)groups(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Brandon Aiken <BAiken(at)winemantech(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: postgresql vs mysql) |
| Date: | 2007-02-23 01:11:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20070223011120.GC7744@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Joshua D. Drake escribió:
> Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote:
> > On 2/23/07, Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> wrote:
> >> That depends greatly on what you're doing with it. Generally, as soon
> >> as you start throwing a multi-user workload at it, MySQL stops
> >> scaling. http://tweakers.net recently did a study on that.
> > I think I recall that wikipedia uses MySQL ... they get quite a few
> > hits, too, I believe.
>
> And outages if you watch :)
Does this mean that we believe the Wikipedia would not suffer any
outages if it ran on Postgres?
How is the Postgres port of the Wikipedia doing this days anyway? Is it
in a shape where one would consider it "competitive"?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Glen Parker | 2007-02-23 01:11:45 | Re: postgresql vs mysql |
| Previous Message | Mark Walker | 2007-02-23 01:04:25 | Re: postgresql vs mysql |