Am 30.04.2017 um 17:09 schrieb Bill Moran: > On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 13:37:02 +0200 > Thomas Güttler <guettl...@thomas-guettler.de> wrote: > >> Is is possible that PostgreSQL will replace these building blocks in the >> future? >> >> - redis (Caching) >> - rabbitmq (amqp) >> - s3 (Blob storage) >> >> One question is "is it possible?", then next "is it feasible?" >> >> I think it would be great if I could use PG only and if I could >> avoid the other types of servers. >> >> The benefit is not very obvious on the first sight. I think it will saves you >> time, money and energy only in the long run. >> >> What do you think? > > There's a well-written article I saw recently that directly addresses > your question ... I'm too lazy to find it, but google will probably > turn it up for you. >
I tried to find it, but failed. Can you give me some keywords to find this well-written article? > Take a message bus for example. PG's notify works pretty damn well as a > centralized message bus. But if you need a distributed message bus or you > need massive throughput, you're almost certainly better of with something > specifically designed for that purpose. SELECT FOR UPDATE ... SKIP LOCKED looks nice: https://blog.2ndquadrant.com/what-is-select-skip-locked-for-in-postgresql-9-5/ > Of course, if you need structured, relational data to be stored reliably, > you can't do much better than Postgres. Yes, PG is our solid central data storage. Regards, Thomas Güttler -- I am looking for feedback for my personal programming guidelines: https://github.com/guettli/programming-guidelines -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
