From: | Oliver Crosby <ryusei(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Looking for tips |
Date: | 2005-07-19 19:11:15 |
Message-ID: | 1efd553a05071912111f6a3121@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> If you're running only a single query at a time (no multiple clients),
> then this is pretty much the definition of a MySQL-friendly workload;
> I'd have to say we are doing really well if we are only 50% slower.
> Postgres doesn't have any performance advantages until you get into
> complex queries or a significant amount of concurrency.
The original port was actually twice as slow. It improved quite a bit
after I added transactions and trimmed the schema a bit.
> You could possibly get some improvement if you can re-use prepared plans
> for the queries; but this will require some fooling with the client code
> (I'm not sure if DBD::Pg even has support for it at all).
Aye. We have prepared statements.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steinar H. Gunderson | 2005-07-19 19:12:03 | Re: Looking for tips |
Previous Message | PFC | 2005-07-19 19:05:27 | Re: Impact of checkpoint_segments under continual load conditions |