On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Jona Christopher
Sahnwaldt
<jcsahnwaldt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
With the indexes defined in tables.sql, query
performance
is ok. For example, selecting the titles of all articles that
are not redirects takes five or ten minutes (didn't profile it
exactly).
Any reason I would like to ask is why not use PostgreSQL?
Seems MySQL is not suitable for handling large table (e.g. over few
GB), I just wonder why wikipedia don't use PostgreSQL?
It should provide better performance.
MediaWiki has used MySQL since the beginning and has let the code get
away with things that shouldn't have been done which makes switching to
Postgres hard.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEAREIAAYFAksHZv0ACgkQ69PBoSWyJd7JeACfVxxq+t4GyWzAGX3BSMxh80da
GSgAoINjp9zKszTUfnEm+RM2ORJpyMjZ
=cWa5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----