On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 15:44, Erik Jones wrote:
> Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 15:04, Mikael Carneholm wrote:
> >
> >> This link adds to the joy...
> >>
> >> http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?25,93181,93181
> >>
> >> So the most popular free "database" in the world is a lousy performing
> >> product that accepts 'gabba gabba hey' as a valid timestamp. Someone
> >> please, give me a reason not to get cynical...
> >>
> >
> > Oh man, that poor guy. He's got 4 or 5 machines in a cluster, and he's
> > still not catching up to the one machine postgresql server.
> >
> > And he's switching because he wants better reliability?
> >
> > Guess he's never heard of pgpool, slony, mammoth replicator, cjdbc, or a
> > half dozen other ways to get high reliability with postgresql.
> >
> > I wonder what version of postgresql he was testing.
> >
> Please, remove pgpool from your list of "reliable" postgresql tools.
> It's decent, but child procs tend to go zombie from time to time.
No, I don't think I will. I've used it and tested it quite thoroughly,
and have never had that happen. Bad hardware on your end maybe? Or an
older version, or a bad compiler?
I've found it to be very stable and reliable. If you've got a
reproduceable test case I'm sure Tatsuo (sp) would love to see it.