Forking vs. Threading
От | Bryan Encina |
---|---|
Тема | Forking vs. Threading |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 001701c40b94$e6a3db20$931f10ac@AT10111 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Forking vs. Threading
Re: Forking vs. Threading |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
Below is a post from the Fedora mailing list as to why one of the users recommends Firebird over PostgreSQL (this thread came up because of questions regarding MySQL licensing) and I was wondering if someone from pgsql advocacy had any comments on this or would like to respond. Sorry for top posting, but I didn't want to ruin any formatting. -b -------------------------------- I like PostgreSQL as far as it's simplicity and things go. It's nice, and there are some good front ends for it. The one complaint I have with Postgres is that it forks. MySQL and Firebird use threads and Postgres forks. Forking is ok, unless you have many database connections. The more connections the more processes. I noticed while profiling an application that every connection alone was taking over 1MB of memory. This based on the process per connection gripe I have. So, Postgres, sure I like it, but as far as a major DBMS goes, I think it is limited by it's memory usage. That's just my opinion on the matter. However, it is a fact that it forks (forking takes more time and more resources than threading). One benefit in forking is the same reason Apache forks( memory leaks can be minimized). However, I think if a DBMS has that bad of a memory leak....I won't use it. I like to advocate Firebird as much as possible. It runs on many platforms and seems to be pretty scalable as far as connections and usage goes, and it has a very flexible license as well. I like all three mentioned DBMS, just different reasons for using them at different times. Wade
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: