Re: Air-traffic benchmark

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Lefteris <lsidir(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Air-traffic benchmark
Date: 2010-02-04 10:41:13
Message-ID: 1265280073.4660.157.camel@ebony
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 13:38 +0100, Lefteris wrote:
> Reported query times are (in sec):
> MonetDB 7.9s
> InfoBright 12.13s
> LucidDB 54.8s

It needs to be pointed out that those databases are specifically
optimised for Data Warehousing, whereas Postgres core is optimised for
concurrent write workloads in production systems.

If you want a best-vs-best type of comparison, you should be looking at
a version of Postgres optimised for Data Warehousing. These results show
that Postgres-related options exist that clearly beat the above numbers.
http://community.greenplum.com/showthread.php?t=111
I note also that Greenplum's Single Node Edition is now free to use, so
is a reasonable product for comparison on this list.

Also, I'm unimpressed by a Data Warehouse database that requires
everything to reside in memory, e.g. MonetDB. That severely limits
real-world usability, in my experience because it implies the queries
you're running aren't ad-hoc.

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew Wakeling 2010-02-04 11:19:57 Re: Optimizing Postgresql server and FreeBSD for heavy read and writes
Previous Message Amitabh Kant 2010-02-04 10:07:57 Re: Optimizing Postgresql server and FreeBSD for heavy read and writes