3 ms·
Sadly at present Postgres has absolutely awful mysqldump support (It's not even on their roadmap) so I doubt it would be a good fit for Pinterest's environment.
by spudlyo 10y ago
Sadly at present Postgres has absolutely awful mysqldump support (It's not even on their roadmap) so I doubt it would be a good fit for Pinterest's environment.
- dijit 10y agois that a joke? of course they wont support mysqldump, but there is pg_dump, which does the same sort of thing except you can dump to binary and compress it on the way without pipes/forks.
- spudlyo 10y agoWait, hold the phone, are you telling me by migrating to Postgres I can shave a handful of system calls off my long-running i/o bound logical backups!? Oh Postgres, is there anything you can't do better than MySQL?
- dijit 10y agoNo I'm telling you that `mysqldump` will not support postgres the same way that a diesel truck will not take petrol.
- spudlyo 10y agoI'm glad you cleared that up, because for a moment there I thought your comment was advocating for Postgres in a thread ostensibly about MySQL by pointing out that pg_dump has baked-in compression; an optimization which could potentially shave milliseconds off a process that the article mentioned can take over 12 hours on large tables. So, putting aside the issue of Postgres not supporting mysqldump for the moment, there is also the issue of Postgres having poor support for the InnoDB on-disk format, and practically non-existent support for the MySQL client protocol. The more I think about this, the more I realize just how unsuitable Postgres is for Pinterest's current environment.
- dreaminvm 10y agoNot sure if you are trolling, but why would Postgres want to support mysqldump? Postgres has pg_dump and MySQL has mysqldump. If you are comparing the capabilities of pg_dump vs mysqldump, that's a different discussion.