Dave Cramer wrote:
> snacktime wrote:
>> I'm working through the architecture design for a new product. We
>> have a small group working on this. It's a web app that will be using
>> ruby on rails. The challenge I'm running into is that the latest
>> conventional wisdom seems to be that since obviously databases don't
>> scale on the web, you should just not use them at all. I have a group
>> of otherwise very bright people trying to convince me that a rdbms is
>> not a good place to store relational data because eventually it won't
>> scale. And of course we don't even have version 1 of our product out
>> of the door. I'll admit we do have a very good chance of actually
>> getting tons of traffic, but my position is to use a rdbms for
>> relational data, and then if and when it won't scale any more, deal
>> with it then.
>>
>> So what would really help me is some real world numbers on how
>> postgresql is doing in the wild under pressure. If anyone cares to
>> throw some out I would really appreciate it.
>>
>>
> I've got a client doing 18M page views/ day and postgresql isn't really
> sweating.
We have a client doing 15k/tps via a website. I would say these, "very
bright people" are "very bright but excessively ignorant".
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Dave
>> Chris
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
