Re: [GENERAL] Are we losing momentum? Answer: Heck No! - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
From | Corey W. Gibbs |
---|---|
Subject | Re: [GENERAL] Are we losing momentum? Answer: Heck No! |
Date | |
Msg-id | 01C30323.FF8C9D90.cgibbs@westmarkproducts.com Whole thread Raw |
List | pgsql-advocacy |
I asked this question last year and here are the responses I received. Good Morning Everyone, I have a general question about who is using Postgresql. This is not a marketing survey and any information I collect will only be used by me. <long drawn out story snipped out which by the way, ended with the user switching to PG, gee the app runs much faster now> Brian Heaton wrote: Corey, My firm is currently using Postgres as the back-end of a military network monitoring app. This will end up being deployed in tactical vehicles. Our databases tend to have 1 huge table (5-10M rows), 2-3 medium tables (50-100K rows), and 2 smaller tables (5-10K rows). Our UI is currently in Java using JDBC (of course). We also interface directly in C from a couple of utility and reporting apps. THX/BDH Brian Hirt wrote: For what it's worth: Our company runs MobyGames (http://www.mobygames.com) a project similar to IMDB, but for video and computer games. We exclusively use postgres. We've been using it since december of 1998 (pg6.5.3) and have been very happy with it. The database is relatively small, around 1.5GB in about 200 tables. All of our pages are dynamically created, and we serve up about 1,000,000 pages a day (each page usually causes at least 20-30 queries against the database.). Most of the database activity is select queries, there is only about 0.5MB - 1.0MB of additional content added a day. The database runs on a single box and has performed well. When there have been problems with postgres, the developers have been very proactive about finding a solution, and the problems have always been resolved within a day or two. From extensive past experience with both Oracle and Sybase, I can say that's great. --brian hirt Kym Farnik wrote: Hi - We use various SQL DBMSs including Postgres. The choice of DBMS depends on customer needs. RD are an Online Application Development company. We have positioned Postgres for the 'entry level' customer. This is a little misleading as some of those customers have quite large databases. By comparision our Govt accounts use Oracle (it's the DBMS of choice for the South Australian Govt). Some of our larger customers also use Oracle. One customer in the advertising/image processing industry has a projected storage requirement of 6 peta bytes. They are using Oracle on Solaris. :-) On the other hand our CMS product uses Postgres as do companies like Ballon Aloft (www.balloonaloft.com.au) To quote our markting stuff... Introduction ------------ Recall Design use PostgreSQL (http://www.postgresql.org) as a Database Management System (DBMS) for web application projects. PostgreSQL is a free, open source DBMS product. This article discusses the advantages of using PostgreSQL over commercial databases such as Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server. Recall Design use Oracle for large and/or multi-server applications. Commercial DBMSs, such as Oracle, are used where specific features, such as Spatial, are required. We design our systems so that customers have the option of migrating their DBMS from PostgreSQL to a commercial DBMS such as Oracle. This allows customers to start low-cost with the option to expand as required. ... More stuff from the Postgres site follows (with GNU legals) Jeff Fitzmyers wrote: One thing that has not been mentioned is the ability to start companies with a very small budget. I am developing the webified office backend on an oldish Mac OSX laptop with postgres / php / apache. I am Mr Mom and the laptop allows me too work instantly with partners, clients and the main website. The flexibility is fantastic. Ever tried to put oracle on a laptop?? A coworker has, and for some reason 5 high end laptops could keep him busy for a few days with oracle, java and configuration, etc. I think it took much longer then an hour just to load oracle. The first time I set up the Mac it took 30 minutes to get everything going with no problems. I met a few of the developers at a past Linux expo. They seemed very nice and very capable. I am very pleased with the development pace and focus of postgres. Each new release is like christmas :-) Plus the postgres lists are great sources of education! Thanks, Jeff Fitzmyers Jeff Self wrote: I understand where you are coming from. I worked for a city government up until a year ago. I built our intranet using Linux on a discarded server with apache and postgreSQL. But they didn't care about the fact that is was free. They wanted all data to be stored on the mainframe. I got tired of the scene and I left to join Great Bridge. We know the rest of this story. I'm now back in city government, although with a different city. They are much more open to creativity here and are allowing me to develop on Linux running postgreSQL. I'm in the process of developing a Job Information System for our Personnel department, whom I work directly for, that will use Apache, PostgreSQL, JSP's, and some Perl. So I'm a happy camper now. Put together a proposal for them. In one column, list the costs for installing PostgreSQL on your existing Linux servers. In the other column, list the cost of a server running Windows XP/2000 with MS SQL server. Don't forget to include the cost of licenses for all 15 users and. Also throw in Visual Studio .net which was just announced the other day. I believe its around $1000 per user. Let them decide. Steve Wolfe wrote: Since I've posted a number of times to this list, it's no big secret that www.iboats.com is powered by Postgres. It's been rock-solid for us, and served us very well. Our data directory is about 1.5 gigs in size, spread out over a few hundred tables, some very small, some very large. We do all of our programming in Perl. Investers have never heard of Postgres, and sometimes mention getting Oracle, so we tell them "Terrific, if you want us to get Oracle, we can do that. We'll just need an extra half-million dollars to do it with." Reality then slaps them in the face..... Tony wrote: The regional foundation for contempory art in Pays de la Loire, France Contact database of about 30K people - mailing Works database with about 700 works of Art - conservation, expo planning... Library database with about 6000 books Clients are all Macs. The reason for leaving the world of closed source was the cost per seat for client licences. There are 10 people using the database. Interface is www, jdbc, jsp The public bit of the works data base will be linked to the web site as will all of the library database. Lief Jensen wrote: Hi, I think we have a technically interesting product: The application: Logging Time & Attendance for employees, production time incl. machinery for invoicing customers and efficiency reports, project times also for customer invoicing, salary calculations including all kinds of weird employee-contract specifics, and of course a lot of reports. The system: Little over 80 tables with an awfull lot of 'foreign keys' originally with referential integrity. Time-stamp input (logging events) range from few hundreds a day to several thousands a day (not that much ;-). Rather heavy access in generating reports, though, since there is a lot of cross referencing tables. In house this is running on PostgreSQL 7.1.2/3 on Linux (Slackware 8.0) AMD K7 500MHz 512MB RAM. The database is only around 50MB with one table having ~20MB. The datacollection (time events like job start, job stop, break start, break stop) is done on a small 'terminal' specially designed for the purpose. These terminals are connected on a two-wire network to a special controller, communicating with a computer using RS232. The interface program (called the OnLine program) is programmed in C++ and can run on both Windows and Linux. In the in-house system the OnLine is running directly on the database server. The OnLine program connects to the database using ODBC, even on Linux. A little history: Our project started in the early days of M$Access (Access 2.0) where everyone sought this was the way to go :-(, at least in my surroundings, my company and our customers. The first project didn't go too well, the system was certainly too complex for Access 2.0 and Windows 3.11. First with the transition to Access 97, the system started to be usable. However, it was still not performing very well and could only be used by small companies. At this time we started using Informix as the backend running on Linux. This was certainly early days for Informix on Linux. It worked, but was difficult to administer and hard for 'novices' like us to get it working good. The main problem was the ODBC driver on Windows and we tried 3 different brands (including Informix' ), in several different versions. All of them needed a lot of modification in Access frontend. Access is certainly not SQL 'clean' and it is very hard to figure out what the JetEngine is doing. However, we got it working, but performance was poor, some reports could take a couple of days (yes, more than 24 hours !!!) and when does a Windows machine run for that long ? ;-) I had been playing with PostgreSQL on my own for some years, and finally last spring we decided to make the move and transfer all data to PostgreSQL 7.1.2. As you all know installing and getting Postgres running is VERY easy and everything including transferring data (I needed to write af few scripts to do it and do a lot of testing) took only a few days. Having everything in PG now the interesting part was to test performance, but first of course the postgres ODBC driver was easy to set up, worked at first shot, and now the performance: reports formerly taking those days were now done in few hours, and with a bit of tweeking we got it down to about 1/2 hour and we really didn't optimize it (no stored procedures or such). Some simpler reports (with almost same results as the heavy ones) I did for our intranet, showing up in split seconds. The system has now been running in-house for almost a year, no break-down, no down time on the database. No NT restart every now and then. (We have another in-house application running on WinNT/M$SQL Server that needs to be restarted every 2. week, even with 1.5GB RAM.) Additional: Have a look at OpenACS (http://www.openacs.org). This is the ACS system moved to PostgreSQL !! A very interesting project. There is also references to sties/people using PG. Greetings, Leif Andrew Gould wrote: My office performs financial and clinical data analysis to find opportunities to improve operations and the quality of patient care. We used PostgreSQL 7.1.3 on FreeBSD to create a relational data model version of most of our Decision Support System and integrated data from additional data sources. We also have data for all inpatients discharged from nonrural hospitals in Texas during 1999 and 2000. We use the state data to derive benchmarks; and apply the benchmarks to internal data. The database for internal data is currently 3GB. The database for the state data in 14GB. I am currently preparing to move the data from several MS Access database applications to PostgreSQL databases. The users will never know anything changed. Since the hospital is mostly a Windows shop; we use MS Access 97 and 2000 as front-ends via ODBC drivers. I have setup phpPgAdmin (Apache web server with PHP4) so that I can answer simple questions from any executive's office in the system. I have a Python script that obtains a current list of PostgreSQL databases. It renames existing .gz dump files to .gz.old. It then vacuums all databases and uses pg_dump and gzip to back them up into individual .gz files. The script is run by cron to ensure that even new databases are backed up automatically on a weekly basis. Andrew Gould Nick Frankhauser wrote: We're not in production yet, but our application needs to scale up by about 70MB per year for each customer we add. All of our customers have about 10 years worth of history to start with, So I figured them to be roughly 1GB each initially. Since our "short list" is for about 35 customers, I mocked up a test database with 35GB of test data & had some family members pound the web site with queries for a few hours. The response time was very reasonable. Our demo site has a much smaller database behind it, but the data was generated by the same random routines that created the large database, so it shows roughly what sort of application we're running (http://www.doxpop.com). Performance seems to be about on par with SQL-server & Oracle, and I've never crashed the database unless I'm abusing root privilege while stupid. Performance and reliability is just not a problem, and you can find it in many products. I think the more important issue is support, and that's where the open-source community leaves the commercial sector in the dust. Here is my support experience: When I used MS SQL-server and Oracle in my last job, if I logged a support call, I'd be lucky to get a response within a day. Of course there is no support outside of normal office hours unless you pony up big money. If I had an interesting problem, it could take days to get escalated up to the people who understood & enjoyed challenging problems. -And of course even "standard" support was pretty pricey. When I was just starting out with PostgreSQL, I *really* screwed up my database with some dumb last-minute changes at 11:30 PM the night before a sales demo, I compounded the problem by moving my WAL files & generally doing many of the things you shouldn't do. I posted frantic requests for help, and received the help I needed at about 2AM. By 3AM, I had received clarification after a second round of questions and by 5AM I was ready for the demo. Around 6AM, two of the developer/guru people had lent their expertise as well. Not only did I get good support in the middle of the night, I also got the personal attention of two developers during the time that most support folks are still stumbling around in search of caffeine. I don't think you can buy that kind of support anywhere. PostgreSQL is a part of our competitive advantage. Of course we try to give back to the community by spending a little time each day being a part of that unusual 365 X 24 support staff on lists like this, but the time spent is minor compared to the savings- and our participation makes us better administrators. Holger Marzen wrote: On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Corey W. Gibbs wrote: > any other server." "Opensource software isn't going any where." "Can we > depend on it?" are common questions and statements I have heard. Can we depend on it? That is the silliest question ever, baut hardly anyone seeh to know why. The important thing about software "in production" is not the price. There is nothing wrong paying good money for good software. But software that comes without source code is no good software. Why? Because the manufacturer drops support for every version withing a few years. And then you have software running that no-one can support. You could say: "OK, so we spend a lot of money every year again and upgrade to the latest version. We accept even the downtime." Yes, if you are lucky. But the manufacturer will finally merge with a competitor or simply vanish. Bang! > I am not trying to start a ruckus or a flamewar, but I would like to know > who's using Postgres out there. What's the application? How big are your > databases? Are you using Visual Basic or C to connect to it through ODBC > or are you using a Web interface? We use PostgreSQL as a database for web servers: raw data to generate network statistics from (about 160.000 rows, growing) and user databases for access privileges. I am very happy that I found mod_auth_pgsql, so PostgreSQL tables can be used with .htaccess. Great! Many people use MySQL for these purposes (and it's OK for simple applications). But why use a lightweight database if I can enjoy transactions, triggers and so on with the full-function PostgreSQL? -- Neal Lindsay wrote: [snip] > I am not trying to start a ruckus or a flamewar, but I would like to > know who's using Postgres out there. [snap] <ruckus> We use it at the small consulting company I work for to track time billed to jobs. The current front end is in Access97 with the backend in PG 7.1.3 (7 tables). I developed it partway in 100% Access and transferred my tables to a PG backend before I deployed it. Tastes great, less filling. Never had a stability problem. I am currently working on a more feature-full version with PG 7.2 on the back and PHP web forms on the front (25+ tables). Access (+ VBA) is like a lot of Microsoft products: they make easy things easy and slightly hard things darn near impossible. I like a lot of abstraction on top of my DB, so Access wasn't cutting it. If the way you store it very similar to the way you see it though (and you don't mind the licensing) Access is pretty nice. Not for the backend though. You (and probably everybody else here) already know, but it bears repeating: Access is not a good multi-user database backend. </ruckus> Neal Lindsay Raymond O'Donnell wrote: Ireland, for whom I've developed a number of web applications of varying scale and complexity. The web server is a windows machine (we've just upgraded from NT4 to 2000) from which COM objects and ASP script talk via ODBC to a Linux machine running PostgreSQL. I'm also currently developing an application for a language school; this is written in Delphi and runs on Windows client machines from which, again, it talks via ODBC to a Linux server running PostgreSQ Andrew Sullivan wrote: We're running the first gTLD since .com, .org, and .net, and we'redoing it with Postgres. Not Oracle. Not DB2. Not Sybase. And notMS SQL Server And you know what? The Oracle developers can't believe how fast it is. Plus we're saving thousands in license fees. It does everything we want and more, and it does it fast. It's stable, and a breeze to administer. > Are you using Visual Basic or C to connect to it through ODBC > or are you using a Web interface? We're using JDBC. Andy Samuel wrote: I use PostgreSQL with Kylix + ZeosDBO for a Point of Sales Application for my client. It has been great ! But the size of the database is not big. I'm currently developing a Hotel Information System with Delphi + ZeosDBO + PostgreSQL ( in Linux ). If you search the email archieve, you'll find some people use it with HUGE amount of data. Shane Dawalt wrote: I'm a network engineer at Wright State University (free software is good :-). I have used Postgresql for production work since version 6.2.3 (1996/7). I use it for two primary operations. I use Perl most of the time with the DBD:Pg and DBI:Pg modules. They work well. I also have used PGP within my Apache web server to access the database, also works very well. 1) We have a large modem bank of around 253 modems. All modems log RADIUS authentication messages as well as activity logs. Each night I process the RADIUS logs from the modem bank servers for the previous day. A perl script summaries the info and stuffs it into the database. Modem sessions are stored for 1 year. I currently have about 1.9 million records in the database taking about 500 megabytes. (I'm re-coding the thing to reduce this space ... I was stupid when I first wrote it.) I have other perl apps that do a second-by-second accounting of all modems. They generate graphs or text output depending on which manager reads it. 2) We have a large number of network ports on our campus with over 5,000 active network ports for faculty/staff alone. We needed a way to enforce our network policies which disallow users from setting up their own repeated/switched/wireless devices (security issues). I have written a database and several perl apps that use SNMP to interrogate all of our Cisco switching devices for ethernet addresses which are updated in a large database. Queries are then ran against the database to find people who are potentially violating our policies and reports are generated. The software has the ability to shut down the associated network ports automatically though this feature has not been enabled just yet. (I'm still in bug-squash mode.) These apps and the database are being hosted on a Digital 433 MHz personal workstation with a single processor. It works well, but would work better if not for its measily 128 Mbytes of RAM. They are rather database-communication intensive. If I wrote some additional PLpgsql functions within the database server itself then alot of the communications would vanish since most of the work would be performed on the server side rather than at the client side. This is for a rainy day though. Bill Gribble wrote: My company is using postgres in several related applications in retail point of sale and inventory management. Our point of sale system, OpenCheckout, uses postgres as its backend. The size of the databases varies according to the retail install, but for a recent trade show demo we loaded up a craft and hobby industry database of UPC codes and item information that contained about 800,000 items. With that size database, random lookups on an indexed field (the UPC code) were reasonably quick. We haven't extensively tested with large numbers of users but our early results are positive. We are also using postgres as a server for a fixed asset tracking system we are working on. Inventory management and computer service people with wireless handhelds (compaq ipaqs running Linux) connect to a postgres server to get network configuration, service history, and hardware information from computers, switches, and even network jack plates keyed on a barcoded property tag. The user just scans the tag with the integrated barcode scanner and can view or edit lots of different kinds of information. And we use the same handheld system to interface to our point of sale inventory database, for receiving people in the warehouse to scan incoming items into the database or for reordering people wandering the aisles of the store. Postgres lets us tie all this together pretty easily. Sad to say :) we use SQLite when we have to go off the network and operate disconnected with the handheld units. The ipaq just doesn't have enough horsepower and storage space (32M of non-volatile storage, 64M RAM) to run postgres locally plus all our software. We keep an audit trail table and replay it when we can get wireless access to the postgres server again. We access the database in a variety of ways. Most of our tools are written in Scheme and use a Scheme wrapper for the libpq libraries. For the accounting components we use a middleware layer based on the 'gnucash' accounting engine, which provides a uniform financial transaction API. The actual POS front end is written in Java (so it can use the JavaPOS point of sale hardware driver standard) and gets many of its configuration parameters from the same database using JDBC. Fernando San Martin Woerner Wrote: Corey I was in your shoes 3 years ago, right now i'm using postgres in place of ms access, from vb with no problem, i fact there's a lot of things better than using access, i work in a medium size construcction company in Chile, we have a business of US$ 20 million by year, our database it's used from internet by phone 56k/b connections, all clients software are programmed in vb using odbc drivers and every things are ok. if you need some gui for windows yo have pgexplorer or pgadmin and are very good. So ms sql server it's not a good option, first: price are expensive, second you need some ms OS to run it and there you loose your reliabity, perfomance and security. postgres it's easy to program and there's a lot of documentation and information plus you can get help from pgsql mailing list that it's better than some technical support. try it. i did it and was a very good experience regards
pgsql-advocacy by date: