[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: regarding backsql performance

> This is so loaded.  Postgresql is entirely configurable and in the long 

Thanks,  been a PostgreSQL DBA for a decade now.

> run, when you're dealing with hundred's of thousands of records, 
> postgresql is going to out perform any local text based db file.

Only back-hdb/back-dbd are *NOT* "local text based db file".  They use
Berkley DB,  and *YES* they are faster than PostgreSQL.  Period.
OpenLDAP back-hdb is about the fastest thing you can find, anywhere.

Of course, back-hdb/back-dbd don't need to support every crazy thing
that a full-blown SQL RDBMS does.

> If you're postgresql database system is configured correctly you'll see no 
> difference with small amounts of records between the two methods,

Disagree;  BUT performance can be entirely acceptable.  You also loosing
performance in the transport between the driver and the database.

>  it's 
> when your data becomes significantly large, that postgresql will blow away 
> the local db file.

No, it won't.  If your OpenLDAP database gets slow as its DB gets big
then you need to attend to your DB_CONFIG file.