From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Mike Nolan <nolan(at)gw(dot)tssi(dot)com>, awerman2(at)hotmail(dot)com (Aaron Werman) |
Cc: | gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk (Gary Doades), pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL and Linux 2.6 kernel. |
Date: | 2004-04-05 15:36:52 |
Message-ID: | 200404050836.52115.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Mike,
> I think it is also possible that Microsoft has more programmers working
> on tuning issues for SQL Server than PostgreSQL has working on the
> whole project.
Ah, but quantity != quality. Or they wouldn't be trolling our mailing lists
trying to hire PostgreSQL programmers for the SQL Server project (really!).
And we had nearly 200 contributors between 7.3 and 7.4 ... a respectable
development staff for even a large corporation.
Point taken, though, SQL Server has done a better job in opitimizing for
"dumb" queries. This is something that PostgreSQL needs to work on, as is
self-referential updates for large tables, which also tend to be really slow.
Mind you, in SQL Server 7 I used to be able to crash the server with a big
self-referential update, so this is a common database problem.
Unfortunately, these days only Tom and Neil seem to be seriously working on
the query planner (beg pardon in advance if I've missed someone) so I think
the real answer is that we need another person interested in this kind of
optimization before it's going to get much better.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-04-05 15:52:51 | Re: performance comparission postgresql/ms-sql server |
Previous Message | Heiko Kehlenbrink | 2004-04-05 15:31:39 | performance comparission postgresql/ms-sql server |