Re: Postgres vs. Progress performance

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Postgres vs. Progress performance
Дата
Msg-id 27643.1064863195@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Postgres vs. Progress performance  (Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>)
Список pgsql-general
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> i feel pretty confident that postgresql can handle your workload without
> much trouble, you just need to give it enough hardware.

I guess the interesting question is how much iron are they using to
handle the workload now on Progress?  Really there's no doubt that PG
can handle the load, the question is what size box would you have to
run it on, and whether that's cost-effective compared to Progress'
requirements.

I vaguely recall some past statements by Progress-to-PG migrators to
the effect that they found PG's performance just fine by comparison.
Try digging in the mail list archives (although "progress" is likely
to be a horrible search term :-()

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Treat
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Postgres vs. Progress performance
Следующее
От: Bjørn T Johansen
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Time problem again?