Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vsMySQL
At 12:39 PM 12/1/00 +0100, Frank Joerdens wrote: >Don Baccus wrote: >> >[ . . . ] >> Well, meanwhile I've gotten confirmation from folks in the PHP world >> (via an openacs forum) > >Which forum is that? I'm asking because I am currently trying to migrate >from PHP to Openacs, or integrate the two somehow (lurking on this list >has convinced me that openacs deserves a hard look indeed), and thus I'd >like to find a forum where relevant stuff is being discussed. Here's the URL to the thread discussion PHP and AOLserver (and other stuff, as naturally happens to threads!) http://openacs.org/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=lY&topic_id=11&topic=OpenACS - Don Baccus, Portland OR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vsMySQL
> "Frank" == Frank Joerdens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Frank> Which forum is that? I'm asking because I am currently Frank> trying to migrate from PHP to Openacs, or integrate the two Frank> somehow (lurking on this list has convinced me that openacs Frank> deserves a hard look indeed), and thus I'd like to find a Frank> forum where relevant stuff is being discussed. Check out the bboard forums at http://openacs.org/ -Dan
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
At 07:50 PM 11/30/00 -0600, GH wrote: >On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 07:58:29AM -0800, some SMTP stream spewed forth: >> At 09:44 AM 11/21/00 -0700, Tim Uckun wrote: >> >> >What about the php module? Does it take advantage of API? >> >> I don't know. If not, though, there wouldn't be much point in using >> AOLserver, since the simple and efficient database API is the main >> attraction. So I think there's a pretty good chance it does. >> > >Through the course of another thread on the lists we have concluded that >PHP does not support the AOLServer (or any other similar) database API. >The "blockage" is that PHP includes its own database functions, albeit >they are based on the Postgres, MySQL, etc. APIs individually. > >I am considering looking into urging an integration of PHP and >AOLServer's connection pooling (for lack of a better word) stuff. Well, meanwhile I've gotten confirmation from folks in the PHP world (via an openacs forum) that it still isn't threadsafe, though there's an effort underway to track down the problems. I don't know how close to solving this they are. - Don Baccus, Portland OR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
At 09:44 AM 11/21/00 -0700, Tim Uckun wrote: >What about the php module? Does it take advantage of API? I don't know. If not, though, there wouldn't be much point in using AOLserver, since the simple and efficient database API is the main attraction. So I think there's a pretty good chance it does. - Don Baccus, Portland OR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
carl garland wrote: > > >perhaps why, even at 5 clients, the page views he shows never went > >significantly above 10/sec? > > I think alot of it has to do with the web server/db setup not pg. They are > using Apache/PHP and looking at their code every page has the additional > overhead of making the db connection. Now if they had used AOLserver with > its persistent db connecction pooling scheme they may have faired better ;) PHP has a persistent PostgreSQL open pg_pConnect() and it does make a difference. I use postgres as a music database back-end for a PHP web server. (Actually it is a web farm, with many instances of the database, one per web server) The one problem I have had with Postgres is its stubborn refusal to use an index. I understand the reasons why it won't, but it is wrong, so I sped it up by starting the backends with -fs. That may be the issue. On a side note: I'm not sure of the current workings of the vacuum and statistics vs indexing issue, I am new to this list, but I do have a 7.0.2 relevant observation: My music database has 50,000 arises and 210,000 albums. Many artists have only one or 2 entries in the albums table (for the youngsters, CD table ;-). About 34,000 have the integer key for "Various Artists" as their artist entry, and another few thousand have things like "Movie Soundtrack" and so on. When the statistics are computed, these relatively few records with a huge number of relations distort the statistics and make it impossible to get postgres to use an index on that table without the -fs switch. This is bad because it always forces use of an index, even when postgres would legitimately ignore it. -- http://www.mohawksoft.com
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
At 09:27 AM 11/15/00 -0800, Tom Samplonius wrote: > AOLServer isn't the only system that can pool database connections, so >can servlets/JSP, ColdFusion, ASP, etc. No doubt AOLServer would be more >widely accepted if it used something other than TCL. There are two separate modules that support Java in AOLserver: ns_tomcat which provides an identical interface as Apache tomcat (and no real advantages) and ns_java, which is coming out of the OpenACS project. ns_java exposes AOLserver's pooled, persistent database API to java. There's also support available for Python, though there's still a lot of work to be done to support the full AOLserver API (same's true of ns_java, actually). If you use ADP pages, your use of Tcl is typically restricted to snippets of code anyway, so I've never really understood the complaints about Tcl... - Don Baccus, Portland OR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
At 01:53 PM 11/15/00 -0500, markw wrote:
>I'd rather not pollute the application's SQL with postgres-isms. Not that I
>don't love postgres, but there are always critics looking for a reason to use
>Oracle or (gasp) MS-SQL.
Define some global variable with the name of the database being run (currently
only Postgres) and guard the SET statement with a conditional...
In the OpenACS project we've got little functions that return query snippets
called things like "db_nextval" that return either "sequence_name.nextval"
or "nextval('sequence_name')" depending on whether the code's running
under Oracle or Postgres. That helps us minimize differences in the source.
- Don Baccus, Portland OR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net.
Re: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
At 11:22 AM 11/13/00 -0500, Robert D. Nelson wrote: >Still...Regardless of what database they're running, either their >abstraction layer is shit or their queries really need optimized. Is that >perhaps why, even at 5 clients, the page views he shows never went >significantly above 10/sec? They don't appear to do any client-side query caching, which is understandable from one point of view (you need some sort of handle on which queries are hit frequently enough to warrant devoting RAM to caching the result, or else you risk caching things that don't gain you much and cut down on the amount of the DB cached in RAM which hits you on other queries). On the other hand, you'd think they'd do some analysis... Still, the table-locking of MySQL just gets in the way. If you can cache everything, then you can send a postal worker to the mailbox to retrieve uncached data without significantly impacting throughput (in other words, the MySQL argument that simple select benchmarks are all you need are not relevant). If you can't cache anything but have few users, then perhaps low levels of concurrency don't hurt. If you don't cache anything but have lots of users, scaling well under high levels of load rule. My thinking is that intellegent caching coupled with a highly-scalable database wins. That's the world I'm used to... - Don Baccus, Portland OR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.
RE: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
Speaking of MySQL, has anyone looked at www.mysql.org recently? They have a big news article: MySQL wins Linux Journal Readers Choice Award again! For the third Year in a row MySQL won the Readers Choice Award in Linux Journal. Considering that MySQL earlier this fall won the Linux Magazine Editors Choice Award, reading magazines on the whole has been a very rewarding experience for MySQL fans lately. If you follow their link to www.linuxjournal.com, all I can find is an article about how _PostgreSQL_ won the Linux Magazine Editors Choice award! What's with that??? Chris > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert D. Nelson > Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2000 12:22 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Fork; Poul L.Christiansen > Cc: pgsql-general; pgsql-hackers > Subject: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL > > > >I made it all the way through the article. I'll summarize it for you: > >Postgres - hooray! > >MySQL - boo! > > Yeah, and that's about it. No analysis or anything. Disappointing, after > waiting so long for the pages to load. > > >Since this is an open source database article linked off of slashdot, I > >imagine they're getting pounded. > > Still...Regardless of what database they're running, either their > abstraction layer is shit or their queries really need optimized. Is that > perhaps why, even at 5 clients, the page views he shows never went > significantly above 10/sec? > > > Rob Nelson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
[GENERAL] PHPBuilder article --
Off of Slashdot: http://www.phpbuilder.com/columns/tim20001112.php3 is an article that is quite favorable to PostgreSQL, about PostgreSQL vs. MySQL on Sourceforge's database. Across-the-board positive. --titus
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Philip Hallstrom wrote: > What is the value for MinSpareServers in your apache's conf? If that's > set to 20, then even if you only hit your site 20 times (one for each), > that many apache processes will continue to live and therefore keep a db > connection open..?? > > What would be interesting to know is after your down how many postmaster > processes are running and how many httpd processes are running... postamaster - 19 httpd - 11 Saludos... ;-) "And I'm happy, because you make me feel good, about me." - Melvin Udall - Martín Marqués email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Santa Fe - Argentinahttp://math.unl.edu.ar/~martin/ Administrador de sistemas en math.unl.edu.ar -
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
> On Jue 16 Nov 2000 22:54, Marko Kreen wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2000 at 01:33:08PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote: > > > > > > I run PHP4 and IMP (http://www.horde.org) and we've gotten then to remove > > > the useof pg_pconnect() since it is broken. Broken how, you might > > > ask? Well, I ran on a standalone machine, no other web users but myself, > > > to test, and each tim eI hit the database with IMP,. it opened a new > > > backend, but it never reused old, idle ones ... eventually, you run out > > > of the ability to connect since you've locked up all connections ... > > > > Maybe you have the apache maxspareservers set too high? I run > > PHP4/apache (debian-woody) and it works ok. If this is only IMP > > site maybe you are better off > > > > apache.MaxClients = postgres.backendcount > > What I can say on my behave is that (as the only user of PHP and Postgres on > the computer) when I login to IMP webmail, quite a lot of postmasters appear, > and don't dissapear after logging off. > but I have no problem. I can be all day with IMP fooling around and the > backend postmaster would stay around the 20 live conections. > > Any comments? What is the value for MinSpareServers in your apache's conf? If that's set to 20, then even if you only hit your site 20 times (one for each), that many apache processes will continue to live and therefore keep a db connection open..?? What would be interesting to know is after your down how many postmaster processes are running and how many httpd processes are running... -philip
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
On Jue 16 Nov 2000 22:54, Marko Kreen wrote: > On Thu, Nov 16, 2000 at 01:33:08PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote: > > > > I run PHP4 and IMP (http://www.horde.org) and we've gotten then to remove > > the useof pg_pconnect() since it is broken. Broken how, you might > > ask? Well, I ran on a standalone machine, no other web users but myself, > > to test, and each tim eI hit the database with IMP,. it opened a new > > backend, but it never reused old, idle ones ... eventually, you run out > > of the ability to connect since you've locked up all connections ... > > Maybe you have the apache maxspareservers set too high? I run > PHP4/apache (debian-woody) and it works ok. If this is only IMP > site maybe you are better off > > apache.MaxClients = postgres.backendcount What I can say on my behave is that (as the only user of PHP and Postgres on the computer) when I login to IMP webmail, quite a lot of postmasters appear, and don't dissapear after logging off. but I have no problem. I can be all day with IMP fooling around and the backend postmaster would stay around the 20 live conections. Any comments? Saludos.. :-) -- "And I'm happy, because you make me feel good, about me." - Melvin Udall - Martín Marqués email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Santa Fe - Argentinahttp://math.unl.edu.ar/~martin/ Administrador de sistemas en math.unl.edu.ar -
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, Charles Tassell wrote:
> Just a note, I've been using Postgres 7.02 and PHP 4.02 or 4.03 for about a
> month in a couple sites, and haven't experienced any problems with
> persistent connections. Problem might have been fixed in one of the point
> releases, or maybe I just don't have enough different db connections to
> trigger it.
I run PHP4 and IMP (http://www.horde.org) and we've gotten then to remove
the useof pg_pconnect() since it is broken. Broken how, you might
ask? Well, I ran on a standalone machine, no other web users but myself,
to test, and each tim eI hit the database with IMP,. it opened a new
backend, but it never reused old, idle ones ... eventually, you run out of
the ability to connect since you've locked up all connections ...
> >
> At 02:05 PM 11/15/00, Adam Lang wrote:
> >PHP 4 was having problems with persistent connections (not sure if with just
> >pgsql or all dbs). Maybe that is why they didn't use it.
> >
> >Adam Lang
> >Systems Engineer
> >Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company
> >- Original Message -
> >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "carl garland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 12:28 PM
> >Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, carl garland wrote:
> > >
> > > # >perhaps why, even at 5 clients, the page views he shows never went
> > > # >significantly above 10/sec?
> > > #
> > > # I think alot of it has to do with the web server/db setup not pg. They
> >are
> > > # using Apache/PHP and looking at their code every page has the additional
> > > # overhead of making the db connection. Now if they had used AOLserver
> >with
> > > # its persistent db connecction pooling scheme they may have faired better
> >;)
> > >
> > > I haven't actually looked at their code they used to test with to
> > > see if they are actually using it, but Apache/PHP has the ability to do
> > > persistent db connections. I would be surprised that someone like Tim (
> > > who seems to have done a fair bit of php with db stuff) would not make use
> > > of such a feature.
> > >
> > > If you can point out an example of where they are not using this
> > > feature I will gladly stand corrected.
> > >
> > >
> > > | Joseph Scott The Office Of Water Programs |
> > > | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> > >
>
>
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: [EMAIL PROTECTED] secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
It is possible. I think the problems were arising before the currentpatch. Problems involved not properly releasing conenctions and they were eventually filling up as used. Adam Lang Systems Engineer Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company - Original Message - From: "Charles Tassell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Adam Lang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 4:54 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL > Just a note, I've been using Postgres 7.02 and PHP 4.02 or 4.03 for about a > month in a couple sites, and haven't experienced any problems with > persistent connections. Problem might have been fixed in one of the point > releases, or maybe I just don't have enough different db connections to > trigger it. > > > At 02:05 PM 11/15/00, Adam Lang wrote: > >PHP 4 was having problems with persistent connections (not sure if with just > >pgsql or all dbs). Maybe that is why they didn't use it. > > > >Adam Lang > >Systems Engineer > >Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company > >- Original Message - > >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "carl garland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 12:28 PM > >Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, carl garland wrote: > > > > > > # >perhaps why, even at 5 clients, the page views he shows never went > > > # >significantly above 10/sec? > > > # > > > # I think alot of it has to do with the web server/db setup not pg. They > >are > > > # using Apache/PHP and looking at their code every page has the additional > > > # overhead of making the db connection. Now if they had used AOLserver > >with > > > # its persistent db connecction pooling scheme they may have faired better > >;) > > > > > > I haven't actually looked at their code they used to test with to > > > see if they are actually using it, but Apache/PHP has the ability to do > > > persistent db connections. I would be surprised that someone like Tim ( > > > who seems to have done a fair bit of php with db stuff) would not make use > > > of such a feature. > > > > > > If you can point out an example of where they are not using this > > > feature I will gladly stand corrected. > > > > > > > > > | Joseph Scott The Office Of Water Programs | > > > | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] | > > >
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
Just a note, I've been using Postgres 7.02 and PHP 4.02 or 4.03 for about a month in a couple sites, and haven't experienced any problems with persistent connections. Problem might have been fixed in one of the point releases, or maybe I just don't have enough different db connections to trigger it. At 02:05 PM 11/15/00, Adam Lang wrote: >PHP 4 was having problems with persistent connections (not sure if with just >pgsql or all dbs). Maybe that is why they didn't use it. > >Adam Lang >Systems Engineer >Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company >- Original Message - >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "carl garland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 12:28 PM >Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL > > > > > > On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, carl garland wrote: > > > > # >perhaps why, even at 5 clients, the page views he shows never went > > # >significantly above 10/sec? > > # > > # I think alot of it has to do with the web server/db setup not pg. They >are > > # using Apache/PHP and looking at their code every page has the additional > > # overhead of making the db connection. Now if they had used AOLserver >with > > # its persistent db connecction pooling scheme they may have faired better >;) > > > > I haven't actually looked at their code they used to test with to > > see if they are actually using it, but Apache/PHP has the ability to do > > persistent db connections. I would be surprised that someone like Tim ( > > who seems to have done a fair bit of php with db stuff) would not make use > > of such a feature. > > > > If you can point out an example of where they are not using this > > feature I will gladly stand corrected. > > > > > > | Joseph Scott The Office Of Water Programs | > > | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] | > >
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
PHP 4 was having problems with persistent connections (not sure if with just pgsql or all dbs). Maybe that is why they didn't use it. Adam Lang Systems Engineer Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "carl garland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 12:28 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL > > On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, carl garland wrote: > > # >perhaps why, even at 5 clients, the page views he shows never went > # >significantly above 10/sec? > # > # I think alot of it has to do with the web server/db setup not pg. They are > # using Apache/PHP and looking at their code every page has the additional > # overhead of making the db connection. Now if they had used AOLserver with > # its persistent db connecction pooling scheme they may have faired better ;) > > I haven't actually looked at their code they used to test with to > see if they are actually using it, but Apache/PHP has the ability to do > persistent db connections. I would be surprised that someone like Tim ( > who seems to have done a fair bit of php with db stuff) would not make use > of such a feature. > > If you can point out an example of where they are not using this > feature I will gladly stand corrected. > > > | Joseph Scott The Office Of Water Programs | > | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] | >
Re: [GENERAL] PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
And now it's on www.slashdot.org ... http://slashdot.org/articles/00/11/13/1342208.shtml Poul L. Christiansen Michael Fork wrote: > > Thought this may be of interest to some... > > http://www.phpbuilder.com/columns/tim20001112.php3 > > Michael Fork - CCNA - MCP - A+ > Network Support - Toledo Internet Access - Toledo Ohio
