snacktime wrote:
> I'm working through the architecture design for a new product. We
> have a small group working on this. It's a web app that will be using
> ruby on rails. The challenge I'm running into is that the latest
> conventional wisdom seems to be that since obviously databases don't
> scale on the web, you should just not use them at all. I have a group
> of otherwise very bright people trying to convince me that a rdbms is
> not a good place to store relational data because eventually it won't
> scale. And of course we don't even have version 1 of our product out
> of the door. I'll admit we do have a very good chance of actually
> getting tons of traffic, but my position is to use a rdbms for
> relational data, and then if and when it won't scale any more, deal
> with it then.
>
> So what would really help me is some real world numbers on how
> postgresql is doing in the wild under pressure. If anyone cares to
> throw some out I would really appreciate it.
>
>
I've got a client doing 18M page views/ day and postgresql isn't really
sweating.
Dave
> Chris
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
>