RE: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] Re: [PHP3] Re: PostgreSQL vs Mysql c omparison

Save yourself (left hand on forehead, right hand on back of head, elbows up)
Thomas, save yourself ;-)

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Thomas Lockhart [mailto:lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu]
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 3:47 PM
>> To: Tom Lane
>> Cc: Bruce Momjian; luuk(at)wxs(dot)nl; pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
>> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] Re: [PHP3] Re:
>> PostgreSQL vs Mysql
>> comparison
>>
>>
>> > I can't get excited about changing this from the standpoint of
>> > functionality, because AFAICS there is no added functionality.
>> > But if we're looking bad on a recognized benchmark maybe we
>> > should do something about it.
>>
>> We are looking bad on a benchmark designed to show MySQL in the best
>> possible light, and to show other DBs at their worst. The maintainers
>> of that benchmark have no interest in changing that emphasis (e.g. we
>> are still reported as not supporting HAVING, even though we have
>> demonstrated to them that we do; this is the same pattern we
>> have seen
>> earlier).
>>
>> The last time I looked at it, there were ~30% factual errors in the
>> reported results for Postgres; no telling what errors are there for
>> other products. imho it is a waste of time to address a bogus
>> benchmark, unless someone wants to take it up as a hobby. I'm a bit
>> busy right now ;)
>>
>> - Thomas
>>
>> --
>> Thomas Lockhart
>> lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
>> South Pasadena, California
>>
>> ************
>>