Re: postgres vs. oracle for very large tables - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: postgres vs. oracle for very large tables
Date
Msg-id 448F6FA1.7060106@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: postgres vs. oracle for very large tables  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>)
List pgsql-general
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 12:24:51PM -0700, TJ O'Donnell wrote:
>> I've written some extensions to postgres to implement
>> chemical structure searching.  I get inquiries about
>> the performance of postgres vs. oracle.  This is a huge
>> topic, with lots of opinions and lots of facts.  But,
>> today I got some feedback stating the opinion that:
>> "Postgres performance diminishes with large tables
>>  (we?ll be going to upwards of hundreds of millions of rows)."

It really depends. I have many customers with hundred of millions of
rows that don't have ANY problems.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


--

             === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
       Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
       Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
                      http://www.commandprompt.com/



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: BLOB & Searching
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Short circuit evaluation of expressions in query