On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 3:16 AM, J. Roeleveld <jo...@antarean.org> wrote: > > Check the link posted by Douglas. > Ubers article has some misunderstandings about the architecture with > conclusions drawn that are, at least also, caused by their database design and > usage.
I've read it. I don't think it actually alleges any misunderstandings about the Postgres architecture, but rather that it doesn't perform as well in Uber's design. I don't think it actually alleges that Uber's design is a bad one in any way. But, I'm certainly interested in anything else that develops here... > >> And of course almost any FOSS project could have a bug. I >> don't know if either project does the kind of regression testing to >> reliably detect this sort of issue. > > Not sure either, I do think PostgreSQL does a lot with regression tests. > Obviously they missed that bug. Of course, so did Uber in their internal testing. I've seen a DB bug in production (granted, only one so far) and they aren't pretty. A big issue for Uber is that their transaction rate and DB size is such that they really don't have a practical option of restoring backups. Obviously they'd do that in a complete disaster, but short of that they can't really afford to do so. By the time a backup is recorded it would be incredibly out of date. They have the same issue with the lack of online upgrades (which the responding article doesn't really talk about). They really need it to just work all the time. >> I'd think that it is more likely >> that the likes of Oracle would (for their flagship DB (not for MySQL), > > Never worked with Oracle (or other big software vendors), have you? :) Actually, I almost exclusively work with them. Some are better than others. I don't work directly with Oracle, but I can say that the two times I've worked with an Oracle consultant they've been worth their weight in gold, and cost about as much. The one was fixing some kind of RDB data corruption on a VAX that was easily a decade out of date at the time; I was shocked that they could find somebody who knew how to fix it. interestingly, it looks like they only abandoned RDB recently. They do tend to be a solution that involves throwing money at problems. My employer was having issues with a database from another big software vendor which I'm sure was the result of bad application design, but throwing Exadata at it did solve the problem, at an astonishing price. Neither my employer nor the big software provider in question is likely to attract top-notch DB talent (indeed, mine has steadily gotten rid of anybody who knows how to do anything in Oracle beyond creating schemas it seems, though I can only imagine how much they pay annually in their license fees; and yes, I'm sure 99.9% of what they use Oracle (or SQL Server) for would work just fine in Postgres). > > Only if you're a big (as in, spend a lot of money with them) customer. > So, we are that (and I think a few of our IT execs used to be Oracle employees, which I'm sure isn't hurting their business). I'll admit that Uber might not get the same attention. Seems like Oracle is the solution at work from everything to software that runs the entire company to software that hosts one table for 10 employees (well, when somebody notices and gets it out of Access). Well, unless it involves an MS-oriented dev or Sharepoint, in which case somebody inevitably wants it on SQL Server. I did mention that we're not a world-class IT shop, didn't I? -- Rich
