Re: Postgres performance comments from a MySQL user

> 3) If your point was to move to a relational database, then you should
> choose Postgres. MySQL, although it's SQL, hardly qualifies as relational
>
> For example, MySQL does not have:
>
> * Views
> * Triggers
> * Stored Procedures
> * Subselects (although they may have added this one)
>
> And then when you want to do real transactions, MySQLs speed slows way
> down.
>
> If you are moving _to_ a database system, it seems pointless to stop
> halfway and go with MySQL, when you can go the full way with Postgres.

According to the MySQL website, subqueries are in 4.1, which is is still
in alpha release.

I can speak with some first-hand experience about both databases.

A project I became involved with this spring was originally begun using
MySQL, but my recommendation as the incoming DB architect/DBA was that
we switch to pgsql, in large measure because of the features listed above.

I also have Oracle 9i, MySQL and pgsql running on the same Redhat 8
platform with similar datasets, so I can address some performance issues,
and when I get past a deadline this month I may be able to run some
three-way performance tests on some moderately large tables (10 million
rows).

Based on some ad-hoc work I've been doing with that data, it appears to me
that Oracle beats pgsql in most update situations, though perhaps that
will change with 7.4.
--
Mike Nolan