Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.databases.postgresql > #166
| From | Don Y <nowhere@here.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.databases.postgresql |
| Subject | Re: Is PostgreSQL good? |
| Date | 2011-06-30 07:05 -0700 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <iuhvrv$5j7$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <ito056$ido$1@bruford.hrz.tu-chemnitz.de><1308640710.210659@proxy.dienste.wien.at><pan.2011.06.21.13.38.10@gmail.com><1308738638.232318@proxy.dienste.wien.at> <pan.2011.06.22.12.02.22@gmail.com> <1308911383.819034@proxy.dienste.wien.at> |
Hi Laurenz, (et al.) [apologies for not having the technical depth to understand these issues better -- I just use PostgreSQL as a "means to an end"... I could use any similar "means" but this seems to work well enough for me] I write a lot of code (in C, etc.) and *deliberately* let the compiler do as much work as possible, for me -- concentrating on picking good *algorithms* instead of micromanaging individual lines of code. If performance is a *real* issue (like processing video frames in real-time) and I *can't* change the hardware (because this isn't a handful of servers, but, rather, thousands of "retail devices"), then I will drop into assembly language to code *very tiny* portions of the algorithm where the gains are the most substantial. I.e., my philosophy is to let the machine do the thinking/work, wherever possible. Can someone please, *gently*, explain *quantitatively* the differences that these issues make in performance? (see below) On 6/24/2011 3:29 AM, Laurenz Albe wrote: > About hints: > ============ > > Let me say that I personally do not feel very strongly > either way - I have used hints in Oracle and get by without them in PostgreSQL. Are hints on a par with the 'register' keyword in C? I.e., something you *hope* gives the compiler an insight into your algorithm -- but, that the compiler is free to *ignore*? Are there consequences to using a "hint" (e.g., using 'register' places constraints on what you can do)? Is the "hint" concept essentially a workaround to compensate for capabilities *missing* in the optimizer? I.e., as C compilers get smarter, they deliberately *choose* to ignore the 'register' keyword because they actually have *more* insight than the programmer! Are there ways (without using a "hint") to coerce the database to perform in the way your hint would *hope* to have it behave? (e.g., can you rewrite the SQL to cause the behavior you seek?) [these all seem to be parallels to the register/compiler example I posed] What sort of *quantitative* difference can this make (example?) that can't, otherwise, be attained? > About vacuum: > ============= > > Of course vacuum is a pain, but every database system has to pay a similar > price somewhere. Either you reduce concurrency (DB2), or (if you use some kind > of MVCC) you can move dead rows somewhere else (Oracle) or leave them where > they are and clean up later. Is this just the difference between automatic garbage collection and "manual" garbage collection (again, relying on parallels to other "languages")? Does the parallel maintain throughout operation or does it fall apart at the extremes? E.g., if garbage collection must be manually initiated (in a language), then failing to do so can eventually cause you to run out of heap, etc. (which causes the application to "fail"). Is the same true when it comes to vacuuming -- or, does performance just suffer? (i.e., will you ever "fill the disk" with dead rows if you fail to initiate a VACUUM operation?) > ROWID: > ====== > > You make the point that because of VACUUM there is nothing compared to > Oracle's ROWID. But do you really need that? Shouldn't a row be referenced > by its primary key? The last question seems to be my understanding of how things should work. (?) (actually, one of the harder ideas for me to get accustomed to in this field :< ) How does a ROWID differ from using an OID? (which I presume is not a good thing) > Fixed size of WAL segments: > =========================== > > Maybe I am dense, but what is the problem there? <grin> I don't even know what they *are*! ;-)
Back to comp.databases.postgresql | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
migrating oracle to postgres Username <user@domain.tld> - 2011-06-20 19:28 +0200
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-20 20:08 +0000
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Username <user@domain.tld> - 2011-06-20 23:45 +0200
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-20 22:37 +0000
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-21 02:01 +0000
Re: migrating oracle to postgres "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-06-21 09:18 +0200
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-21 13:38 +0000
Is PostgreSQL good? (was: migrating oracle to postgres) "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-06-22 12:30 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Harry Tuttle <OTPXDAJCSJVU@spammotel.com> - 2011-06-22 13:15 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? (was: migrating oracle to postgres) Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-22 12:02 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2011-06-22 21:52 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-22 22:43 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? (was: migrating oracle to postgres) "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-06-24 12:29 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Hans Castorp <REWYRLXHEGHO@spammotel.com> - 2011-06-24 12:57 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-06-24 14:53 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-24 16:32 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? (was: migrating oracle to postgres) Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-24 13:53 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? (was: migrating oracle to postgres) "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-06-27 11:17 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? (was: migrating oracle to postgres) Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-28 06:11 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-06-28 10:34 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-28 13:30 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-06-29 09:50 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-29 21:38 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-06-30 09:14 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <mgogala@no.address.invalid> - 2011-06-30 13:22 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-06-30 07:05 -0700
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-30 15:41 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-06-30 16:49 +0100
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-30 19:24 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-06-30 13:21 -0700
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-30 22:42 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-07-01 11:57 -0700
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-07-01 22:58 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-01 14:07 +0100
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-07-01 13:29 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-06-30 13:17 -0700
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-30 23:53 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-07-01 10:13 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-07-01 13:38 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-07-01 16:58 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-07-01 15:33 +0000
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-07-01 11:39 -0700
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-07-04 16:39 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-07-04 12:11 -0700
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-07-05 08:58 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-07-05 11:29 -0700
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-07-06 09:00 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-07-06 01:00 -0700
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? "Laurenz Albe" <invite@spam.to.invalid> - 2011-07-07 09:05 +0200
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-07-07 00:34 -0700
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Matthew Woodcraft <mattheww@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-04 20:12 +0100
Re: Is PostgreSQL good? Don Y <nowhere@here.com> - 2011-07-04 12:24 -0700
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-06-23 17:48 +0200
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-23 16:42 +0000
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-23 18:57 +0000
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-06-26 17:35 +0200
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-26 19:08 +0000
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-06-27 00:32 -0700
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Mladen Gogala <no@email.here.invalid> - 2011-06-28 16:00 +0000
Re: migrating oracle to postgres Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-06-28 22:28 +0200
csiph-web