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 <ros...@gmail.com> > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:52 PM, <ocalde...@solucionesaplicativas.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@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general >
