3 ms·
Better even is that PostgreSQL 9.0 will have solid master/slave async replication. PostgreSQL already supports better write concurrency and multi-core scaling t
by rbranson 17y ago
Better even is that PostgreSQL 9.0 will have solid master/slave async replication. PostgreSQL already supports better write concurrency and multi-core scaling than InnoDB or MyISAM, and the replication will bring web-style read scaling into the picture. PostgreSQL has a "free-er" license, a more unified community, and isn't burdened by possibly hostile ownership.
- pedalpete 17y agoI don't think we can say PostgreSQL is truly 'better' than the non-relational databases which are beginning to permeate the web. I believe the decision is more of a mySql/postgreSQL vs. non-relational databases. Sure, PostgreSQL may have better implementations of certain features than MySQL, but for most web developers, mysql is good enough. How would put PostgreSQL against non-relational dbs?
- itgoon 17y agoI'm only just getting into my first nosql (Cassandra), so I've got no real-world data on it, but I think it would perform in the "well enough" category in performance. Just implement the tables with two columns: a key and a value, and index the crap out of them. It would also have the benefit of better tools and the option to use a JOIN or a transaction where it made sense. Of course, you could do the same with MySql, too.
- rbranson 17y agoI'm not advocating PostgreSQL over a NoSQL. It certainly won't scale like Cassandra. I'm advocating it over MySQL. With the 9.0 release, it will be to a point where there won't be any reason to chose MySQL. PostgreSQL is easier to deploy and simpler to configure, has more features, is less likely to screw up your data, and has more scalable performance.