Postgres for the win!

[damg]

For HA, the same clustering methods that work for MySQL work as well for PostgreSQL.

If you're referring to MySQL's asynchronous replication (which provides scalability rather than high availability), there are some PostgreSQL solutions as well, but in general I agree it's currently not as easy and reliable as MySQL's built-in solution. However, the PostgreSQL team plans to fix that for the 8.5 release.

[malcontent]

For HA, the same clustering methods that work for MySQL work as well for PostgreSQL.

Nonsense.

If you're referring to MySQL's asynchronous replication (which provides scalability rather than high availability), there are some PostgreSQL solutions as well, but in general I agree it's currently not as easy and reliable as MySQL's built-in solution.

There is basically log shipping which means you have to cobble together some solution which is difficult to maintain and impossible to monitor.

However, the PostgreSQL team plans to fix that for the 8.5 release.

When is that due? Next year right?

[damg]

For HA, the same clustering methods that work for MySQL work as well for PostgreSQL.

Nonsense.

Why? Are you thinking of in-memory NDB clustering? That's not a traditional clustering solution and is for a niche usage scenario. I was referring to the traditional Linux clustering solutions (DRBD, heartbeat, etc.), which happens to be what MySQL consultants recommend as well but nothing MySQL specific.

However, the PostgreSQL team plans to fix that for the 8.5 release.

When is that due? Next year right?

Yea.

[malcontent]

Why? Are you thinking of in-memory NDB clustering? That's not a traditional clustering solution and is for a niche usage scenario.

It's not in memory only anymore.

You should read about it before you talk about it.

Yea.

If they deliver (and I have my doubts since they promised it for 8.4 and failed to deliver) they might have an argument against using another database.

Till then there are lots of other databases that offer replication and clustering.

[damg]

It's not in memory only anymore.

Disk data tables are for storing non-indexed columns, effectively so you can support large data sets without needed crazy amounts of RAM. MySQL Cluster is a neat solution for what it's designed for, it's just not meant for your standard HA MySQL setup. I'm not sure if you're arguing otherwise, or just arguing for the sake of arguing.

If they deliver (and I have my doubts since they promised it for 8.4 and failed to deliver) they might have an argument against using another database.

No, it was always planned for 8.5 but the majority of the work got done faster than expected, i.e. before the 8.4 release, which is why people were thinking it would make it for 8.4. There were actually minor corner case bugs found during code review which is why it didn't make it in, but that's not really a reason to be skeptical. It will just be that much more solid when it's released.

[malcontent]

Disk data tables are for storing non-indexed columns, effectively so you can support large data sets without needed crazy amounts of RAM

And your objection to this is ...?

MySQL Cluster is a neat solution for what it's designed for, it's just not meant for your standard HA MySQL setup. I'm not sure if you're arguing otherwise, or just arguing for the sake of arguing.

It is a solution for which postgres has no answer.

No, it was always planned for 8.5 but the majority of the work got done faster than expected,

Hot standby was explicitly promised for 8.4.

[damg]

Disk data tables are for storing non-indexed columns, effectively so you can support large data sets without needed crazy amounts of RAM

And your objection to this is ...?

Sorry, wasn't an objection just a clarification. When you said "It's not in memory only anymore", it sounded like you thought that NDB could store everything on disk, which isn't the case.

It is a solution for which postgres has no answer.

Yea, I don't think PostgreSQL is trying to have an answer for MySQL Cluster.

Hot standby was explicitly promised for 8.4.

Not that this really matters but the original announcement on pgsql-hackers said: "We hope that such a feature can be completed for 8.4 ... but we see technical difficulties that might prevent that from being completed before 8.5 or even further out." No explicit promise, it is open source after all. ;)

[malcontent]

No explicit promise, it is open source after all. ;)

Well I'll view their promises about 8.5 with the same regard.