Re: Success stories of PostgreSQL implementations in different companies

Yes, i'm agree with you. What i tried to say was that, here in my country,
Oracle support is very extended in the largest companies of the country,
and those companies trusts that Oracle is a highly scalable and robust
database, what is absolutely true, but they think that PostgreSQL is
something like a "mini database" for small purposes like small web apps or
personal desktop applications just because it's free, but i know that
PostgreSQL is capable to be scalable and robust as Oracle or related
databases, but i didn't have arguments to say to some software chief in a
company "Hey, PostgreSQL is also capable of support a lot of TPS and work
in a production environment with a lot of users (if the server is well
configured and there are reasonable hardware resources)", but you're right
about what you said.

Regards.

***************************
Oscar Calderon
Analista de Sistemas
Soluciones Aplicativas S.A. de C.V.
www.solucionesaplicativas.com
Cel. (503) 7741 7850

2013/5/24 Chris Angelico <rosuav(at)gmail(dot)com>

> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:52 PM, <ocalderon(at)solucionesaplicativas(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > Thank you all of you for your answers! It helps me a lot because when
> I'm trying to convince a client to migrate to PostgreSQL sometimes they
> think that because it's free, it only works for small databases for web or
> desktop applications with a few users...
>
>
> It's worth noting, by the way, that even options that "scale badly"
> are often well used. How many huge web sites do you know of that are
> built using Ruby on Rails? That's a system that actually cannot scale
> past one CPU core, on its own; but there are ways around that by
> bolting stuff to the outside (eg Apache and Passenger). And a single
> core of a single computer with even a moderate amount of memory by
> today's standards (just a few gig, say) can serve a fair amount of
> traffic without noticing it. I have a server sitting a couple of
> meters from me that's getting fairly old now - single-core CPU, 2GB
> RAM, Ubuntu Karmic, etc - and it's happily serving a number of
> community web sites. Not huge traffic of course, but we're talking a
> few thousand hits per day per web site, up to 5-10K perhaps for the
> busier ones... and the server barely gets above 0.01 load average. I
> could handle a hundred times that traffic easily. In terms of database
> load, it takes hundreds of transactions per *second* to be called
> busy, but unless you have insane concentration in peak periods, that
> represents upwards of 8,640,000 actions per day. There's a huge gap
> between "desktop app with a few users" and ten million transactions a
> day.
>
> ChrisA
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>