>FWIW, my own experiments with tests like this suggest that PG is at
worst about 2x slower than mysql for trivial queries. If you'd reported
a result in that ballpark I'd have accepted it as probably real. 6x I
don't believe though ...
OTOH, my tests using BenchmarkSQL
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/benchmarksql) shows that PG can deliver
up to 8x more transactions/minute than a well-known proprietary DB on
similar hardware (with 100 concurrent connections) - can't post the
results due to licence restrictions of the proprietary vendor though. In
fact, PG on a single SCSI disk machine did even beat the other DB when
the other DB had a fully equipped CX200 Dell/EMC SAN, if only with 30%
this time. Note that in the latter case, the other DB is unable to use
async IO due to problems running on linux kernel 2.4.9. And yes, PG was
running with fsync on.
It's only a benchmark though, and real-life useage is what counts in the
end (after all).
Regards,
Mikael