Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic
Folks, > What they don't say is whether that is a 50% speed up from the > default settings or a 50% increase from a carefully hand tunes file. AFAIT, most of their performance speed-up comes from two sources: 1) a carefully hand-tuned compile of Postgres using ICC, and 2) Improving on the default postgres.conf params. BTW, they have set up 3 pgfoundry projects to contribute some-but-not-all of their improvements to the community, and have actively sought feedback from me, Bruce, Simon and others on how and what to contribute. They also paid for Alvaro's work on shared locks. So if that code has been slow in coming, that's due to their staff being overcommitted (it's a start-up). -- --Josh Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic
Josh, On 2/18/06 7:38 AM, "Luke Lonergan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I figure they'll have to do quite a lot to make progress in their chosen > market, including: > > - SQL*Net protocol compatibility > - Oracle Number datatype support > - ROWID unique row identifier > - Oracle Redo/Undo log format parsing and replay > - SQL Loader format support > - Oracle exp/imp format support I forgot one: - Make sort ordering equivalent to Oracle (trailing blanks don't count, for instance) - Luke ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic
Josh, On 2/18/06 7:15 AM, "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > EnterpriseDB is a fork of PostgreSQL that contains a reasonable level of > pl/SQL (Oracle) compatibility. > My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that they support packages, > in, inout paramters etc.. in > the same syntactical way that Oracle does. Thanks! I figure they'll have to do quite a lot to make progress in their chosen market, including: - SQL*Net protocol compatibility - Oracle Number datatype support - ROWID unique row identifier - Oracle Redo/Undo log format parsing and replay - SQL Loader format support - Oracle exp/imp format support The broader Oracle enterprise market is used to a high level of integration of Oracle instances across the enterprise, and their DBAs are highly trained to use these features. - Luke ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic
I also wonder where their project is too - they seem publicly opaque about progress, etc. From the web site's statements it looks like they've written a tool to tune the postgresql.conf file from which they claim a 50% speed-up, but that's not new or unique "fork-level" functionality. EnterpriseDB is a fork of PostgreSQL that contains a reasonable level of pl/SQL (Oracle) compatibility. My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that they support packages, in, inout paramters etc.. in the same syntactical way that Oracle does. Joshua D. Drake - Luke ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: http://www.flamingspork.com/blog/2006/02/16/enterprisedb-where-is-the-source/ Any comments on this? Is he referring to EnterpriseDB extensions that they don't make public? I think so. Trying to "battle" the perception that EnterpriseDB is an open source database. Seems though that little effort is made to understand the actual relationship between EnterpriseDB and PostGreSQL. Looks like an attempt at pitting "dual license GPL/closed source" vs. "proprietary BSD based". regards, Lukas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic
Any comments on this? Is he referring to EnterpriseDB extensions that they don't make public? I've noticed a lot of press lately is mentioning their name next to ingres as an alternative to MySQL, so the MySQL folks might be feeling some Postgres heat from their direction. I also wonder where their project is too - they seem publicly opaque about progress, etc. From the web site's statements it looks like they've written a tool to tune the postgresql.conf file from which they claim a 50% speed-up, but that's not new or unique "fork-level" functionality. What they don't say is whether that is a 50% speed up from the default settings or a 50% increase from a carefully hand tunes file. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic
Christoper, On 2/15/06 11:14 PM, "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Any comments on this? Is he referring to EnterpriseDB extensions that > they don't make public? I've noticed a lot of press lately is mentioning their name next to ingres as an alternative to MySQL, so the MySQL folks might be feeling some Postgres heat from their direction. I also wonder where their project is too - they seem publicly opaque about progress, etc. From the web site's statements it looks like they've written a tool to tune the postgresql.conf file from which they claim a 50% speed-up, but that's not new or unique "fork-level" functionality. - Luke ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
[HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic
http://www.flamingspork.com/blog/2006/02/16/enterprisedb-where-is-the-source/ Any comments on this? Is he referring to EnterpriseDB extensions that they don't make public? Chris ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
