On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Andy angelf...@yahoo.com wrote:
Skype, perhaps the largest telephony app in the world, uses Postgresql.
Here's some info on their postgresql usage:
http://highscalability.com/skype-plans-postgresql-scale-1-billion-users
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Thomas Løcke thomas.granv...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Andy angelf...@yahoo.com wrote:
Skype, perhaps the largest telephony app in the world, uses Postgresql.
Here's some info on their postgresql usage:
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Thomas Løcke thomas.granv...@gmail.com
wrote:
Anybody know of any recent comparisons made between the two?
I'm in the process of buying a new telephony related software suite,
if you are writing stuff in C/C++,
Greg Smith wrote on 02.05.2010 01:16:
Scott Ribe wrote:
PG's locking scheme, MVCC, basically precludes certain specific
optimizations that means a small number of very specific queries don't
perform as well, while at the same time it means that throughput with
multiple simultaneous connections
Løcke thomas.granv...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Thomas Løcke thomas.granv...@gmail.com
Subject: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL vs. Microsoft SQL server
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Date: Saturday, May 1, 2010, 2:47 PM
Anybody know of any recent
comparisons made between the two?
I'm in the process
Anybody know of any recent comparisons made between the two?
I'm in the process of buying a new telephony related software suite,
and I'm getting mixed advice. Some say that MSSQL is _much_
better/faster than PostgreSQL, and others say the opposite.
The vendor is more or less indifferent, with a
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Thomas Løcke thomas.granv...@gmail.com wrote:
Anybody know of any recent comparisons made between the two?
I'm in the process of buying a new telephony related software suite,
and I'm getting mixed advice. Some say that MSSQL is _much_
better/faster than
On Sat, 1 May 2010, Thomas Løcke wrote:
Anybody know of any recent comparisons made between the two?
A Google search will turn up a lot of comparisons.
I'm in the process of buying a new telephony related software suite, and
I'm getting mixed advice. Some say that MSSQL is _much_
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Thomas Løcke thomas.granv...@gmail.com wrote:
Anybody know of any recent comparisons made between the two?
I'm in the process of buying a new telephony related software suite,
and I'm getting mixed advice. Some say that MSSQL is _much_
better/faster than
Thomas Løcke wrote:
Anybody know of any recent comparisons made between the two?
for purely SQL, I prefer Postgres by a wide margin.But, MS SQL
Server comes with a whole infrastructure that includes a lot of powerful
tools, like replication, data extraction and translation, active
On May 1, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Thomas Løcke wrote:
The
sales-people all bang on about MSSQL being the superior choice, and
PostgreSQL being a toy compared to the Microsoft RDBMS.
This is complete bullshit.
I say that as someone who spent years using MS SQL Server, and who very much
enjoyed
Scott Ribe wrote:
PG's locking scheme, MVCC, basically precludes certain specific optimizations
that means a small number of very specific queries don't perform as well, while
at the same time it means that throughput with multiple simultaneous
connections scales extremely well with multiple
On May 1, 2010, at 5:16 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
SQL Server uses MVCC too as of their 2005 release, implemented with row
versioning similarly to Postgres. The main non-MVCC holdout at this point is
DB2.
Funny, I've ported to even later versions than that, but missed the change.
Well, OK, I'm
On Sat, 2010-05-01 at 20:47 +0200, Thomas Løcke wrote:
--Anybody know of any recent comparisons made between the two?
I'm in the process of buying a new telephony related software suite,
and I'm getting mixed advice. Some say that MSSQL is _much_
better/faster than PostgreSQL, and others say
On 02/05/10 02:47, Thomas Løcke wrote:
I've not been able to convince them to send me some actual benchmark
numbers, which actually should turn on quite a few alarms, come to
think about it. :o)
Is performance really your #1 criterion anyway?
I'd be looking at management, reliability,
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Craig Ringer
cr...@postnewspapers.com.au wrote:
I'd be looking at management, reliability, backup, integration into the
rest of the infrastructure, product longevity, support, etc. Performance
you can always throw hardware at.
And given the relatively high
16 matches
Mail list logo
