Steve Lane wrote:
> On 7/13/02 5:11 AM, "Curt Sampson" <cjs@cynic.net> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Elaine Lindelef wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, there are points to quibble on, but overall, I thought it was a
> >> decent article that exposed people to the idea of using PostgreSQL.
> >
> > Well, yeah, but it's really time to kill, properly, this idea that
> > postgres is always slower than mysql. I'm reasonably convinced that
> > under fairly heavy OLTP loads with some large queries going, MySQL would
> > grind to a halt at loads much less than postgres can handle.
> >
> > The only area I know of where MySQL is noticably faster is when
> > dealing with large amounts of data in tables with very short rows;
> > MySQL has much less row overhead, so of course it's faster. Though
> > people are working on reducing postgres' row overhead as well,
> > which will help....
> >
>
> Are there any current benchmarks showing postgres' performance against other
> major dbs? I've only seen one, and I think it's a couple of years old. Eweek
> profiled major commercial dbs and had mySQL as the open source
> representative. Not even a whisper about PgSQL. I'd love to see some current
> numbers, just to fend off with a stick the people who keep asking me why I
> don't use mySQL.
I have heard we are faster for multi-user queries than MySQL and haven't
heard anyone dispute that.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026