Andy <angelflow(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> Your results of 867MB for Postgresql & 3,576 MB for InnoDB are surprising. Do you know why it is so much smaller for Postgresql? Are there any indexes?
If I understood the original report correctly, they were complaining
mostly about index size, so a table without indexes certainly isn't
a real helpful comparison. Still, this brings up an important point:
AFAICS the paper doesn't even mention which mysql storage engine they're
using. So it's *really* hard to tell what we're comparing to.
> Are all Postgresql indexes based on GIN & GiST?
No, certainly not. See
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/indexes-types.html
regards, tom lane