On Sun, 21 Nov 1999, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Several people reminded me that MySQL is faster than PostgreSQL.
> However, performance is far less important to me than the basic
> question of stability. The database must be stable enough to run
> almost 24x7 and must never suffer from data corruption or from
> mysterious crashes.
>
> Is anyone out there actually using PostgreSQL for a mission critical
> application?
>
> Is PostgreSQL ready for prime time?
We've using Postgresql for nothing but mission critical work. Never have
any problems with it. Don't have any complaints about the speed. We were
running 6.3.2 for a long time, and recently upgraded to 6.5.x
Supposedly the newer version has some speed benefits, but again, we've
never had any problems with speed to begin with.
We chose postgresql over mysql about 3 years ago, due to the more complete
sql support. Other than that, I just liked it better.
Postgresql handles the authentication for our dial-up users.. we have over
6000 users dialing into our network.
The same server also handles request for some dynamic web pages which
request information from postgresql.. sometimes with over a million hits
per hour.
All in all we've got about 100 different DBs on the server. All mission
critical as far as I'm concerned, some more than others obviously.
I've also received some great and timely help through the postgresql
mailing lists.
Good luck
Kevin
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Heflin | ShreveNet, Inc. | Ph:318.222.2638 x103
VP/Production | 333 Texas St #175 | FAX:318.221.6612
kheflin@shreve.net | Shreveport, LA 71101 | http://www.shreve.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------