From: | Lukas Kahwe Smith <smith(at)pooteeweet(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
Subject: | L |
Date: | 2007-08-13 16:39:18 |
Message-ID: | 46C08936.7040302@pooteeweet.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-www |
Hi,
Sorry for bringing these two points up so late:
1) One of the disadvantages of the multi storage engine concept is that
you rally need to tune the settings for each of them independently and
that they tend to use separate buffers etc. So in effect one must
realize that you are running independent storage components with a
single SQL parser! So in the current version of your document you only
talk about key buffers, but these will not affect all storage engines! I
am not a DB tuning expert, so this should be double checked.
2) In the spirit of MySQL silently ignoring what it does not support,
MySQL will actually implicitly commit after several kinds of statements
including all DDL.
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/implicit-commit.html
Overall I am very impressed with what you have done here. It truly
sounds well balanced and I am more versed in MySQL than PostgreSQL.
Before we publish it, we might also want to alert some of the high
profile MySQL tuning experts and get their comments. I can take care of
this if you would like me to.
regards,
Lukas
regards,
Lukas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2007-08-13 16:52:17 | Re: Postgresql vs. MySQL page techdocs conversion |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-08-13 16:18:15 | Re: Postgresql vs. MySQL page techdocs conversion |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2007-08-13 16:52:17 | Re: Postgresql vs. MySQL page techdocs conversion |
Previous Message | Jeff MacDonald | 2007-08-13 16:38:58 | Re: Change to community logins |