| From: | Kevin Murphy <murphy(at)genome(dot)chop(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mikkel Høgh <mikkel(at)hoegh(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Drupal and PostgreSQL - performance issues? |
| Date: | 2008-10-14 14:59:14 |
| Message-ID: | 48F4B3C2.1050805@genome.chop.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
Greg Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Mikkel H�gh wrote:
>
>> You are targetting DBAs using servers with less than 512 MB RAM. Is
>> PostgreSQL supposed to be used by professional DBAs on enterprise
>> systems or is it supposed to run out of the box on my old Pentium 3?
>
> you'll discover that the Linux default for how much memory an
> application like PostgreSQL can allocate is 32MB. This is true even if
> you install the OS on a system with 128GB of RAM.
One thing that might help people swallow the off-putting default "toy
mode" performance of PostgreSQL would be an explanation of why
PostgreSQL uses its shared memory architecture in the first place. How
much of a performance or stability advantage does it confer under what
database usage and hardware scenarios? How can any such claims be proven
except by writing a bare-bones database server from scratch that can use
multiple memory models?
-Kevin Murphy
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2008-10-14 15:00:12 | Re: PL/pgSQL stored procedure returning multiple result sets (SELECTs)? |
| Previous Message | Francisco Figueiredo Jr. | 2008-10-14 14:58:15 | Why select 1 where current_date = 'infinity'; doesn't work? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ang Chin Han | 2008-10-14 15:28:03 | Re: Drupal and PostgreSQL - performance issues? |
| Previous Message | Ivan Sergio Borgonovo | 2008-10-14 14:28:22 | Re: Drupal and PostgreSQL - performance issues? |