Re: MySQL vs PG TPC-H benchmarks

From: "Cestmir Hybl" <cestmirl(at)freeside(dot)sk>
To: "Paul Thomas" <paul(at)tmsl(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>, "Nick Barr" <nicky(at)chuckie(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: MySQL vs PG TPC-H benchmarks
Date: 2004-04-21 13:31:02
Message-ID: 037701c427a4$e41a38a0$0200a8c0@stratos
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

> Looks like he's using the default postgresql.conf settings in which case
> I'm not suprised at pg looking so slow.

The question also is, IMHO, why the hell, postgreSQL still comes out of the
box with so stupid configuration defaults, totally underestimated for todays
average hardware configuration (1+GHz, 0.5+GB RAM, fast FSB, fast HDD).

It seems to me better strategy to force that 1% of users to "downgrade" cfg.
than vice-versa.

regards
ch

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Paul Thomas 2004-04-21 14:08:09 Re: MySQL vs PG TPC-H benchmarks
Previous Message Paul Thomas 2004-04-21 12:55:21 Re: MySQL vs PG TPC-H benchmarks