Database Dilemma... Please help.

Nick Barker nlbarker at gmail.com
Thu Apr 6 12:23:30 MDT 2006


The question is how wide are your rows and how well do you index. 
Personally I find this the biggest issue on speed with any database. 
Good luck finding someone that has 100 million records.  I cannot help
you there.

On 4/6/06, Jason Jones <poeticintensity at gmail.com> wrote:
> I recently got hired as the resident Linux-Geek for a new company headed by
> a guy who has created 5 of the fortune 500 companies.  My co-worker (we'll
> call Fred) recently got hired as well....  Fred has 9 years of MS-SQL DBA
> experience.
>
> We have a situation where we're using MySQL 5.0 and are only dealing with
> very limited, read "around 100Megs" amounts of data which will surely grow
> to more than 100 million rows of data shortly.
>
>   Fred is luckily open-minded enough to accept the fact that MySQL ($0.00)
> is better than MS-SQL ($15,000.00) at the current time due to our lack of
> data.  However....  He's pretty convinced that this is surely not going to
> be the case when the data grows.
>
> Fred has concrete evidence of his ability to handle more than 100 million
> rows of data per table with MS-SQL with little to no loss of speed.
>
> I'm dead set on keeping my OSS databases, but am having a hard time finding
> concrete evidence that either Postgres OR MySQL can handle more than 100
> million rows of data per table without suffering speed hits.
>
> Can anyone here point me to something, somewhere that gives numbers on any
> OSS datbase handling that amount of data and maintaining good numbers on
> speed, with possible hints as to its configuration?
>
> I've personally never handled any OSS db with more than a couple hundred
> thousand rows TOTAL, (but have around 3 years exp. handling many various
> smaller dbs) and am kind of twitchy about what's going to happen with our db
> as it grows exponentially to hundreds of millions of rows.
>
> Hardware is not an issue.  Disk space is not an issue.  The only issue is
> whether MySQL (or PostgreSQL) can be properly configured to handle hundreds
> of millions of rows per table without hacking it into some slashdot-esque
> frankenstein configuration.
>
> Any takers for this one?  I'm kind of scared I'm going to lose the CEO on
> this battle and switch to MS-SQL.... I'm dealing with a guy who is extremely
> competent in MS-SQL and has demonstrated abilities to handle any amount of
> data.  If I can demonstrate the same ability with an OSS solution, I'm sure
> I'll win and keep the OSS solution, due to the obvious financial advantages.
>
> Thanks anyone who points me to any helpful information.
>
> --Jason
>
> PS - I have a pretty good amount of experience with MySQL, but am certain
> PostgreSQL is just as good.  If information can be given about *any* OSS db
> solution, I'd be most grateful.  Thank you.
>
> /*
> PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
> Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
> Don't fear the penguin.
> */
>


--
Nick Barker
785-3824



More information about the PLUG mailing list