Re: [GENERAL] New FAQ item - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Geraldo Lopes |
---|---|
Subject | Re: [GENERAL] New FAQ item |
Date | |
Msg-id | 3786B4A3.19AE4ECA@altavista.net Whole thread Raw |
In response to | New FAQ item (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
List | pgsql-general |
Hi, What about available platforms, and some notes about porting pgsl to Windows . (I'm watching this list, with this interest in mind). Geraldo Lopes de Souza Bruce Momjian wrote: > Here is a new FAQ item that tries to answer the question of how > PostgreSQL compares to other DBMS alternatives. Comments? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 1.14) How does PostgreSQL compare to other DBMS's? > > There are several ways of measuring software: features, performance, > reliability, support, and price. > > Features > PostgreSQL has most features present in large commercial > DBMS's, like transactions, subselects, and sophisticated > locking. We have some features they don't have, like > user-defined types, inheritance, rules, and multi-version > concurrency control to reduce lock contention. We don't have > foreign key referential integrity or outer joins, but are > working on them for our next release. > > Performance > PostgreSQL runs it two modes. Normal fsync mode flushes every > completed transaction to disk, guaranteeing that if the OS > crashes or looses power in the next few seconds, all your data > is safely stored on disk. In this mode, we are slower than most > commercial databases, partly because few of them do such > conservative flushing to disk in their default modes. In > no-fsync mode, we are usually faster than commercial databases, > though in this mode, an OS crash could cause data corruption. > We are working to provide an intermediate mode that suffers > from less performance overhead than full fsync mode, and will > allow data integrity within 30 seconds of an OS crash. The mode > is select-able by the database administrator. > > In comparison to MySQL or leaner database systems, we are > slower because we have transaction overhead. We are built for > flexibility and features, not speed, though we continue to > improve performance through profiling and source code analysis. > > Reliability > We realize that a DBMS must be reliable, or it is worthless. We > strive to release well-tested, stable code that has a minimum > of bugs. Each release has at least one month of beta testing, > and our release history shows that we can provide stable, solid > releases that are ready for production use. We believe we > compare favorably to other database software in this area. > > Support > Our mailing list provides a large group of developers and users > to help resolve any problems encountered. While we can not > guarantee a fix, commercial DBMS's don't always supply a fix > either. Direct access to developers, the user community, > manuals, and the source code often make PostgreSQL support > superior to other DBMS's. There is commercial per-incident > support available for those who need it. (See support FAQ > item.) > > Price > We are free for all use, both commercial and non-commercial. > You can add our code to your product with no limitations, > except those outlined in our BSD-style license stated above. > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle > maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue > + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
pgsql-general by date: