[CentOS] Centos/Linux Disk Caching, might be OT in some ways
jses27 at gmail.com
Tue Jan 26 07:30:53 UTC 2010
On Tue, 2010-01-26 at 13:41 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
> JohnS wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-01-26 at 08:19 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
> >> Are complicated relationships being stored in postgresql and not in
> >> mysql? I do not know how things are now but mysql has a history of only
> >> being good for simple selects.
> > Selects can get very upity for mysql as in "VIEWS". They can do Concat,
> > Inner Join and Outter among many more things. VIEW myview as SELECT can
> > do some very very logical calcs and predictions. I promise it is not
> > just for simple selects.
> By 'being good only for simple selects' I meant performance wise. Which
> is what this thread is all about - performance. Sure you can make
> complicated queries on mysql but compared to postgresql they would take
> quite some time. Again, this is based on stuff in the past. Maybe mysql
> has improved now.
Sure, I knew what you meant, but we gonna Bang Heads on your definition
of simple selects. I can't compare performance to postgresql but I am
willing to bet that mysql can do alot more. Doing something like a
"Breadth First" or "Depth First" logical operation, it is sad for me to
even say MySQL is faster in that area with predictions than MSSQL.
Having said that I really love mssql and sqlce. Now we getting OT.
Great things started to happen with mysql @ version 5 >. Now it's just
probally going to wither away. Who really knows?
> I am just happy that more stuff started supporting postgresql before the
> Sun buyout. They would have had some time to mature instead of a frantic
> 'we need to add/convert to postgresql just in case'. But I will still go
> for mysql with connection caching if it is just a simple table lookup
> that needs to be remotely querable.
More information about the CentOS