Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>>> FYI, Postgres is know to be used successfully on some *extremely* heavy
>>> websites, without using tables pinned in memory.
>>>
>>
>> +1
>
> I give this a +/- 1. Yes extremely heavy websites can do this *but*
> they require extremely expensive hardware to do so.
>
>
I expect extremely heavy websites to require extremely expensive
equipment regardless of the software they use. Cost was not the issue
raised by the OP.
cheers
andrew
>
>
