Greg Williamson wrote:
> Our tests -- very much oriented at postGIS found Oracle to be between 5
> and 15% _faster_ depending on the specifics of the task. We decided to go
> with postgres given the price difference (several hundred thousand dollars for
> Oracle in the configuration we needed vs. zip for postgres -- we already had
> trained postgres DBAs).
>
Can always throw the licensing savings toward larger hardware too; $100K
buys a pretty big server nowadays. At the FAA's talk about their
internal deployment of PostgreSQL:
https://www.postgresqlconference.org/2010/east/talks/faa_airports_gis_and_postgresql
They were reporting that some of their difficult queries were
dramatically faster on PostgreSQL; I vaguely recall one of them was 100X
the speed it ran under Oracle Spatial. It was crazy. As always this
sort of thing is very workload dependent. There are certainly queries
(such as some of the ones from the TPC-H that big DB vendors optimize
for) that can be 100X faster on Oracle too.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.us