Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Ryan pfp
Ryan
@ryansmith
A rebuttal to Uber’s PG/MySQL paper. Keep in mind, PG has changed since this discussion. A lot of the replication issues are long since put to rest. The storage sub-systems are the interesting point of difference between these systems. MYSQL’s indexes point to primary keys instead of a CTID. An update to a MySQL row will have same storage location but PG will be a new CTID/page — unless it was a Heap Only Tuple (HOT) update. But this means PG can reduce IO for queries. As with anything, it’s always a tradeoff. However, database systems in particular are especially sensitive to workload details. The tradeoffs really matter! https://thebuild.com/presentations/uber-perconalive-2017.pdf
1 reply
1 recast
9 reactions

Ryan pfp
Ryan
@ryansmith
@bytebot does this match your understanding?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Colin Charles pfp
Colin Charles
@bytebot
We can actually do this comparison again… without being dogmatic. I think one missing bit is the expertise + expertise hired for Uber to build on mysql too. A lot has changed for pg, since. Might even make a good space / article
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction