[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debbugs: The Next Generation

On Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 03:11:11AM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 08:39:44PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > I think it would be safe to say that CPU and I/O requirements would, overall,
> > be considerably less than the current debbugs for an equal set of features.
> > The prototype runs great on my workstation, which makes master look like a
> > beast.  Enhancements such as full text searching would have to be tested for
> > resource requirements before unleashing them, of course.
> You will get all sorts of locking and handle issues in the real world. Look
> at bugzilla, where they have to invent a shadow database for the queris.
> This might be less a problem of postgressql, but you should at least be awre
> that you are not testing typical load :)

I believe bugzilla uses MySQL by default, which is known to have these kinds of
issues.  At the risk of starting a flamewar, PostgreSQL seems to scale quite a
bit better.

> Besides that, i think it is a great step to have a dataabse. If it needs to
> be used for all stuff (like keeping the email messages archived) is another
> question, but we will see if it works how it performs :)

I'll put together some test CGIs and make a simple query interface available on
this little box for folks to play with.  I don't really have the resources here
to import the entire bug database, but I'll see if I can get my hands on
another system to test with.

 - mdz

Reply to: