From: | Mauro Bertoli <bertolima(at)yahoo(dot)it> |
---|---|
To: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgres performance |
Date: | 2005-03-02 11:24:56 |
Message-ID: | 20050302112456.79149.qmail@web51406.mail.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Hi Richard, thank you for your apreciated answers!!!
- start quote -
Well, do you care whether your data is consistent or
not? If not, you
don't need transactions.
- end quote -
I don't require transaction because the query aren't
complex and update a single tuple (in SELECT
transactions are useless)
- start quote -
You'll find inserts/updates with lots of users is
where PostgreSQL works
well compared to other systems.
- end quote -
Uhhmm.. this is interesting...
- tutorial links -
Thx, now I read it and test an hardware tuned
configuration... I read that is not very simple... :O
Another question:
- why postgres release aren't already configured
(hardware tuning)? isn't possible configure it during
installation?
- why postgres use a new process for every query ?
(mySQL, if I'm not wrong, use threads... I think its
faster)
- why connection time is slower? (compared to mySQL)?
- why postgres require analyze? (mySQL, if I'm not
wrong, don't require it)
Yours answers will be very apreciated! Thx
___________________________________
Nuovo Yahoo! Messenger: E' molto più divertente: Audibles, Avatar, Webcam, Giochi, Rubrica
Scaricalo ora!
http://it.messenger.yahoo.it
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | lucas | 2005-03-02 11:30:33 | Multiples schemas |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2005-03-02 10:28:45 | Re: Postgres performance |