I believe they probably do believe it and it was probably driven by a
complete lack of understanding of PostgreSQL.
This part kills me:
- slow (even for
small datasets)
- jokes on
3-table-joins
I wonder what version of PG they did their testing/development on? I
bet it was a version w
On 10/22/06, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/22/06 06:45, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> Tomi NA wrote:
I was just reading http://www.opencrx.org/faq.htm where RDBMS engines
a
On Sun, 2006-10-22 at 08:12 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On 10/22/06 06:45, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> >> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>> Tomi NA wrote:
> I was just reading http://www.opencrx.org/faq.htm where RDB
On 10/22/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:> Ron Johnson wrote:>> That implies malice. The people at OpenCRX apparently really>> believe what they wrote.
> I believe they probably do believe it and it was probably driven by a> complete lack of und
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>> That implies malice. The people at OpenCRX apparently really
>> believe what they wrote.
> I believe they probably do believe it and it was probably driven by a
> complete lack of understanding of PostgreSQL.
> It doesn't hav
Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/22/06 06:45, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Tomi NA wrote:
I was just reading http://www.opencrx.org/faq.htm where RDBMS engines
are one of the questions and see pgsql bashed sentence after sentence.
Can any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/22/06 06:45, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Tomi NA wrote:
>>> I was just reading http://www.opencrx.org/faq.htm where RDBMS engines
>>> are one of the questions and see pgsql bashed sentence after sentence.
>>> Can anyone off
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Tomi NA wrote:
I was just reading http://www.opencrx.org/faq.htm where RDBMS engines
are one of the questions and see pgsql bashed sentence after sentence.
Can anyone offer any insight as to weather it's fact or FUD?
It is 100% FUD.
What would be the incentive for Open
On 10/7/06, Tomi NA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was just reading http://www.opencrx.org/faq.htm where RDBMS engines
are one of the questions and see pgsql bashed sentence after sentence.
Can anyone offer any insight as to weather it's fact or FUD?
FUD
postgresql in particular is an enormous f
On Oct 7, 2006, at 6:41 PM, Chris Browne wrote:
This could also be a situation where adding a few useful indexes might
fix a lot of ills. Better to try to help fix the problems so as to
help show that the comparisons are way off base rather than to simply
cast stones...
i'm too tight for cash
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Broersma Jr) writes:
>> did you notice this line
>> ---
>>
>> *** Please note that we do not recommend PostgreSQL for production
>> use. While PostgreSQL may be fine for many settings this DBMS simply
>> does not deliver the performance required for openC
Title: Re: [GENERAL] performace review
Denormalization should reduce the number of joins and reduce the overall number of tables, yes? And the idea is to fully normalize and then back off because of physical limitations in the database you're using *with full knowledge and understanding
Tomi NA wrote:
> I was just reading http://www.opencrx.org/faq.htm where RDBMS engines
> are one of the questions and see pgsql bashed sentence after sentence.
> Can anyone offer any insight as to weather it's fact or FUD?
It is 100% FUD.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> t.n.a.
>
> ---
On Oct 7, 2006, at 23:44 , Brandon Aiken wrote:
I download the db source (inside opencrx-1.9.1-
core.postgresql-8.zip) and executed their three schema files,
dbcreate-indexes.sql, dbcreate-views.sql, dbcreate-tables.sql.
Each of the 118 tables has a three-field composite primary key of
'P
Title: [GENERAL] performace review
It wouldn't surprise me if their bashing were correct, but I doubt that it's PostgreSQL's fault.
I download the db source (inside opencrx-1.9.1-core.postgresql-8.zip) and executed their three schema files, dbcreate-indexes.sql, dbcreate-view
> did you notice this line
> ---
>
> *** Please note that we do not recommend PostgreSQL for production
> use. While PostgreSQL may be fine for many settings this DBMS simply
> does not deliver the performance required for openCRX (PostgreSQL
> takes minutes/hours to calculate 3-
On Oct 7, 2006, at 3:31 PM, Alexander Staubo wrote:
I don't see PostgreSQL being "bashed sentence after sentence",
however -- the two "known limitations" listed for PostgreSQL are
"slow (even for small datasets)" and "jokes [sic] on 3-table-joins"
-- and among the open-source databases men
On Oct 7, 2006, at 20:06 , Tomi NA wrote:
I was just reading http://www.opencrx.org/faq.htm where RDBMS engines
are one of the questions and see pgsql bashed sentence after sentence.
Can anyone offer any insight as to weather it's fact or FUD?
As with any use of a database, it is useless and/o
I was just reading http://www.opencrx.org/faq.htm where RDBMS engines
are one of the questions and see pgsql bashed sentence after sentence.
Can anyone offer any insight as to weather it's fact or FUD?
t.n.a.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't '
19 matches
Mail list logo
