Re: Great Bridge re-runs benchmark with MySQL "tuned"

From: Michael Widenius <monty(at)mysql(dot)com>
To: "Poul L(dot) Christiansen" <plc(at)faroenet(dot)fo>
Cc: Ned Lilly <ned(at)greatbridge(dot)com>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Great Bridge re-runs benchmark with MySQL "tuned"
Date: 2000-08-23 09:31:36
Message-ID: 14755.39416.424717.881045@narttu.mysql.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


Hi!

>>>>> "Poul" == Poul L Christiansen <plc(at)faroenet(dot)fo> writes:

Poul> It would be interesting to see how well PostgreSQL performed when it was
Poul> tuned.

Poul> Or has it allready been tuned?

Yes, it was. According to Ned, they did run vacuum() on the tables
before running the test and they also started PostgreSQL with some big
cache sizes as the default setup is designed to not take too much
resources (like with most other databases).

Unfortunately the first benchmark press announcement didn't provide
all information of how the test was run (which made it impossible to
comment or even understand the test results). This was the main
reason I did write an comment about the benchmark on Devshed after the
results was released.

It would be interesting to know Interbase would perform if it was setup
optimally...

Regards,
Monty

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Roodie 2000-08-23 09:58:21 some problems
Previous Message Michael Widenius 2000-08-23 09:20:34 Great Bridge re-runs benchmark with MySQL "tuned"