Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences

От: Guillaume Cottenceau
Тема: Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences
Дата: ,
Msg-id: 87lj58vuta.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan
(см: обсуждение, исходный текст)
Ответ на: Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Marti Raudsepp)
Список: pgsql-performance

Скрыть дерево обсуждения

Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (A B, )
 Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Thom Brown, )
  Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Thom Brown, )
  Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (A B, )
 Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Guillaume Cottenceau, )
  Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Marti Raudsepp, )
   Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Guillaume Cottenceau, )
 Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Szymon Guz, )
  Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (A B, )
   Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Marti Raudsepp, )
    Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Thom Brown, )
    Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Guillaume Cottenceau, )
     Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Jon Nelson, )
      Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Robert Haas, )
       Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Andy Colson, )
        Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Robert Haas, )
   Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Craig Ringer, )
   Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  ("Lello, Nick", )
    Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Dimitri Fontaine, )
    Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Klaus Ita, )
 Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Craig Ringer, )
  Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (A B, )
 Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Devrim GÜNDÜZ, )
  Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Mladen Gogala, )
 Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Chris Browne, )
  Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Bruce Momjian, )
   Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Fabrízio de Royes Mello, )
   Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Robert Haas, )
    Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Bruce Momjian, )
     Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Jeff Janes, )
      Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences  (Bruce Momjian, )

Marti Raudsepp <marti 'at' juffo.org> writes:

> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 13:11, Guillaume Cottenceau <> wrote:
>> Don't use PostgreSQL, just drop your data, you will end up with
>> the same results and be even faster than any use of PostgreSQL.
>> If anyone needs data, then just say you had data corruption, and
>> that since 100% dataloss is accepted, then all's well.
>
> You're not helping. There are legitimate reasons for trading off
> safety for performance.

Cccepting 100% dataloss and datacorruption deserves a little
reasoning, otherwise I'm afraid I'm right in suggesting it makes
little difference to use PG or to drop data altogether.

--
Guillaume Cottenceau


В списке pgsql-performance по дате сообщения:

От: Robert Klemme
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Simple (hopefully) throughput question?
От: Josh Berkus
Дата:
Сообщение: Major Linux performance regression; shouldn't we be worried about RHEL6?