On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:30:19 +0200, Leif Biberg Kristensen wrote:
> On Monday 25 April 2011 10:41:36 Linos wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> only want to link this blog post
>>
>> http://blog.kimiensoftware.com/2011/04/top-10-missing-postgresql-features
>> ,
>> i think he may have any good points.
>>
>>
>> Miguel Angel.
>
> Maybe the best point is the one between the lines: That PostgreSQL is
> being
> compared to Oracle on a feature-by-feature basis. I don't know if his
> views
> are representative for Oracle DBAs, but it's an indication of
> PostgreSQL being
> considered in the same league as Oracle.
>
> The «features» perceived to be missing from PostgreSQL by the Oracle
> DBA is
> the icing on the cake. The cake itself (in terms of data integrity,
> performance, scalability) is obviously regarded as totally edible.
>
> regards, Leif
All this small features creates good database in terms of database
system, which is administrative and developer friendly.
For example, having knowledge when particular query stuck may be great
advantage for administrators and developers as well. Ofcourse each
functionality gives some overhead, but from other hand, if you create
important systems (like financials) "stability" and how it's easy to
track errors is required.
Form this what I was interested and saw:
* I think he good pointed that logging indices, may be unneeded, as
those can be recreated.
* Approach for I/O - I have constant feeling that ShMem is wasted for
storing copy of system cache, but I don't know better solution, as well
I saw in bufmgr.c method for preloading data, but I don't know if it's
used somewhere.
* Some operations may fill cache with "trash".
Regards,
Radek
