Slashdot Mirror
.org TLD Now Runs on PostgreSQL
johnnyb writes "The .org domain, which has long run on Oracle systems, is now being transferred to a PostgreSQL system. I guess we can now dispel the "untested in mission-critical applications" myth."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Actually, this is a good question. What is the database used for? Profile information for WHOIS searches? That would make the most sense, and isn't *that* big a deal. A database to handle name resolution is a bit of overkill I think.
And not to distract that yes it's good to see PostgreSQL getting some mainstream fame.
I had the misfortune of dealing with oracle tech support team once and I can say I am not surprised the ".org" domain has shifted to PG.
The DB was locking up when trying to retrieve data from a large table (>10 M rows) using a very complex query.The oracle guys kept suggesting that reduce the size of the table.
Now seriously is that a valid option ? Hey man , I have a million bucks in my acct. and i can't withdraw from the ATM ??
Just delete some of it and then try again ?
Or the most common answer from Oracle tech team is "we know its a problem but we will not fix it in this release. Just buy the next version if you want it fixed ?
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
I was a designer of the system that runs .nz (New Zealand), which is also based around PostgreSQL, running on three replicated back-end application servers.
The system was developed in mod Perl and went live on October 14th 2002.
The plan is to release this (including client software) under the GPL after a stabilisation period.
Or are we supposed to pronounce it POST-GRE-SEE-KWEL? Or POST-GRES-CUE-ELL? Or POST-GRES-QUERY LANGUAGE?
And where the hell did that name come from? Did they take "Ingres", and increment it (like how C became C++), thereby making it "Postgres"? Then "PostgreSQL" means "the better-than-Ingres query language"?
I hate it when techies come up with names. It always ends up being something that's either stupid and meaningless, like C#, or self-referential and too-cute-by-half, like GNU. Recursive acronym my ass.
Shame on Google.
"untested in mission-critical applications"?
You'd have to be a completely ignorant moron to believe that. A good number of large companies have been running PostgreSQL succesfully in mission-critical situation for *years*.
It's been used in network-monitoring apps for deployment in military vehicles, $30 million POS systems, medical systems, ticketmaster, a good number of heavy-traffic web sites, and just about everything else you can think of.
Anybody who told you it hadn't been tested was living long in the past.
steve
Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
I love PostgreSQL, have used it in a small (million-record) transactional application with great success, and am pleased to see the implied advocacy of having .org run on it. Nonetheless 2.4 million
records is hardly enterprise-level stress. I would really like to see
some serious benchmarks against Oracle. My tests on a small PC-based Linux
server last year showed that pg beat Oracle mainly because the bloat of
Oracle caused excessive thrashing, but on a large mainframe-type
application - billion-record type stuff - I simply have no idea. A
couple of years ago some benchmarks were published on the web but got
quickly taken down by Oracle under threat of lawsuit - their license
doesn't allow publication of benchmarks - and I never got to see them.
I think this is wrong. Perhaps the recent ruling against EDA benchmark
restrictions will open a door towards Oracle benchmarks?
One of the PostgreSQL developers is at Linux.conf.au right now. During his talk on Wednesday he mentioned this and that Oracle accused the .org registry guys of "criminial negligence" if they switched to PostgreSQL over Oracle. All I can say is: "HAH!" Feeling the pressure...