[Asterisk-Dev] PostgreSQL support in Asterisk 1.2?

[Adam Goryachev]

On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 08:45 -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
> On Thursday 04 August 2005 01:52, Adam Goryachev wrote:
> > For an environment with very few writes and a lot of selects, his
> > solution might be the best one, or, at least, it probably isn't worth
> > changing it until he reaches some limitation.
> What *you* are forgetting is that people bitch and whine about the performance 
> of Asterisk's flat file configuration format and point to Realtime for 
> performance increases and instant-updates... and then they throw MySQL into 
> the mix and completely undermine everything they've been bitching about!

They also install asterisk on a P1-133MHz machine with 16 MB RAM and
moan about poor audio quality when running 27 channels with g.729 codec
in meetme conferences. What is your point?

> What the hell good is MySQL in a realtime Asterisk environment when you go to 
> update a user and the entire PBX waits because some table is locked?  What 
> [snip etc]

Well, since it works, and it works well in a number of environments. Or maybe 
because somebody somewhere decided to write the code for asterisk to make it work.
If you have such a problem with postgres not being natively supported, then stop
wasting time writing contrived emails, and write some code (or pay someone to do it).

> Of course, by the time you've reached this point you'll have so much time and 
> energy invested into your hacked up solution that you will refuse to accept 
> that you made a mistake early on and will instead religiously defend your 
> choice of tools, well beyond any rational argument.

Sure, this happens, then again, you just might be stuck in some
different corner with your
postgres DB solution.... You can't try to tell me that there are no
cases where some other DB would perform better than postgres...  well,
you can, but then it's just a religion :)

> > PS, why do people insist on talking about old versions of software in
> > order to tell you it is bad? The past has been and gone... IMHO, focus
> > on the here and now, or even better, the near future.
> Until I have it installed on my system, it's vapour.

Please read before you reply. I was pointing out that talking about
historic versions of mysql is as helpful as talking about historic
versions of postgres... ie, how does postgres 6.3 compare to mysql
5.0 ??

> > PPS, this is totally off-topic, and should be saved for some other
> > mailing list somewhere else, where people are actually interested in
> > talking about whose DB is bigger/faster/more colourful
> No actually it's relevant, even if only peripherally.  People need to know 
> what they're getting in to.

Not quite..... mysql is the perfect solution for a small PBX, eg, a
small office, where they might add that new user once every 6 months.
That means that it MAY be possible for 2 calls per year to be delayed by
3 ms at one point in the call flow.... if there was actually any calls
being processed at that precise time, and they weren't stuck at one
point in the IVR while listening to some prompt etc...

Anyone implementing a large scale solution (or something that should be
capable of scaling) should do their homework both in sizing their
servers, and in determining the best hardware, OS, DB, PBX/soft
switch/VoIP software, etc...

Anyway, I'll just continue along my merry way for now, enjoying mysql.

PS, I did actually suggest someone look into postgres just yesterday,
but it would seem they are going to stick to MS SQL and just throw more
hardware at the problem

Regards,
Adam