|
|
#1
03-02-2006, 08:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
PT: Postgre DB Advantages?
Hi,
I've been around here for a bit and pokertracker still seems to elude me. I'm wondering what the advantages and disadvantages of converting to a postgre SQL database. I looked around the pt forums and didn't find much help - it just seems like an alternative database. Anyone offer a little insight? I'm getting tired with pt's crappy performance and am kinda hoping this might boost speed. -eric 
|
|
#2
03-02-2006, 08:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PT: Postgre DB Advantages?
Main advantage is that it can handle DBs larger than 2GB. This only really effects you if you have over 500k hands.
As for speed increases, I found none at all. It took about 50 hours to import about 900k hands into a fresh PG DB on a friends PC which has 2GB mem, dual processors, and a raid array HD (It just crashed on mine each time I tried). After doing all this I came to the sad conclusion that something is flawed about PT's DB schema itself or the parsing code is badly written. Since then I move to PokerManager, which does not yet have all of the features of PT, but does handle large amounts of data much better. Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#4
03-02-2006, 10:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PT: Postgre DB Advantages?
[ QUOTE ]
Main advantage is that it can handle DBs larger than 2GB. This only really effects you if you have over 500k hands. As for speed increases, I found none at all. It took about 50 hours to import about 900k hands into a fresh PG DB on a friends PC which has 2GB mem, dual processors, and a raid array HD (It just crashed on mine each time I tried). After doing all this I came to the sad conclusion that something is flawed about PT's DB schema itself or the parsing code is badly written. Since then I move to PokerManager, which does not yet have all of the features of PT, but does handle large amounts of data much better. Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Its not going to help the write time as much as it will the access and load times. Access is a pretty terrible DBMS, and PSQL has so many advantages and optimizations that it definetly will be faster in things that aren't constrained by hard drive write times.
|
|
#5
03-02-2006, 10:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PT: Postgre DB Advantages?
Is it worth the 2 days of conversion time, though, for this increase in performance?
-eric
|
|
#6
03-02-2006, 11:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PT: Postgre DB Advantages?
[ QUOTE ]
Is it worth the 2 days of conversion time, though, for this increase in performance? -eric [/ QUOTE ] It depends whether you plan on have a huge database at some point in the future.
|
|
#8
03-03-2006, 06:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PT: Postgre DB Advantages?
[ QUOTE ]
For reference, I convert a database that had maybe 100k hands, and it took about 4 hours on my laptop. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, for some strange reason PT suffers from exponential decay in performance. I don't think anybody has worked out why this is the case, but 100k hands will import proportionally much quicker than 500k hands. Also after getting to near 1 million hands, I found that I could observe/play at a faster rate than PT could actually import my hands. Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#9
03-03-2006, 06:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PT: Postgre DB Advantages?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Main advantage is that it can handle DBs larger than 2GB. This only really effects you if you have over 500k hands. As for speed increases, I found none at all. It took about 50 hours to import about 900k hands into a fresh PG DB on a friends PC which has 2GB mem, dual processors, and a raid array HD (It just crashed on mine each time I tried). After doing all this I came to the sad conclusion that something is flawed about PT's DB schema itself or the parsing code is badly written. Since then I move to PokerManager, which does not yet have all of the features of PT, but does handle large amounts of data much better. Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Its not going to help the write time as much as it will the access and load times. Access is a pretty terrible DBMS, and PSQL has so many advantages and optimizations that it definetly will be faster in things that aren't constrained by hard drive write times. [/ QUOTE ] I can only comment on my attempted use with PlayerView (PAHUD could be much better with PG DBs). When using with PlayerView I found it to actually be slower at retrieval than simply using the two access DBs I had before conversion. Also, I have a bit of a crappy system, so this might not be the best testbed for this... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#10
03-03-2006, 06:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PT: Postgre DB Advantages?
[ QUOTE ]
Do Postgres PT databases have another, larger, size limit? [/ QUOTE ] No, I don't think so (or if it does it will be some huge limit and PT performance will have degraded to the stage of total unuasability long before...). [ QUOTE ] Does PAHud work with PokerManager? [/ QUOTE ] Sadly no, but I think the main thing holding up development in PokerManager is the general lack of interest. PT seems have the market fairly well cornered, but IMHO it is not bc it is the best application, it is simply bc it got in their first and had better marketing. Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
