X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 986F89FA38F for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:24:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 66247-09 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:24:44 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A594E9FA1A8 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:24:44 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k5E2Of5h018927; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:24:41 -0400 (EDT) To: "Jim C. Nasby" cc: John Vincent , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: scaling up postgres In-reply-to: <20060613224523.GL34196@pervasive.com> References: <20060603094355.GA23297@uio.no> <1150062140.23423.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <448D3B65.7090709@aeccom.com> <448DE0DB.1020107@planet.tn> <20060613192609.GX34196@pervasive.com> <20060613212124.GD34196@pervasive.com> <20060613220509.GJ34196@pervasive.com> <20060613224523.GL34196@pervasive.com> Comments: In-reply-to "Jim C. Nasby" message dated "Tue, 13 Jun 2006 17:45:23 -0500" Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:24:41 -0400 Message-ID: <18926.1150251881@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200606/235 X-Sequence-Number: 19592 "Jim C. Nasby" writes: > On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 06:21:21PM -0400, John Vincent wrote: >> Actually it's on my radar. I was looking for a precompiled build first (we >> actually checked the Pervasive and Bizgres sites first since we're >> considering a support contract) before going the self-compiled route. When I >> didn't see a pre-compiled build available, I started looking at the >> developer archives and got a little worried that I wouldn't want to base my >> job on a self-built Postgres on a fairly new (I'd consider Power 5 fairly >> new) platform. > Well, pre-compiled isn't going to make much of a difference > stability-wise. What you will run into is that very few people are > running PostgreSQL on your hardware, so it's possible you'd run into > some odd corner cases. Power 5 is just a PPC64 platform isn't it? Red Hat's been building PG for PPC64 for years, and I've not heard any problems reported. Now, if you're using a non-gcc compiler then maybe that track record doesn't carry over to whatever you are using ... regards, tom lane