| From: | Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)myrealbox(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL is much faster than MySQL, only when... |
| Date: | 2003-11-26 06:13:41 |
| Message-ID: | 3FC44495.40004@myrealbox.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general |
Robert Treat wrote:
> Yes. I think the gist of your post was "out of the box postgresql
> performed like garbage compared to mysql, but then i spent some time
> tweaking and tuning, taking advantage of indexes, and now it performs so
> quickly that i am unable to make any changes within mysql to match
> postgresql's performance"
I would put it this way. 'Applications designed for mysql does not perform good
when ported to postgresql when porting means "just make it work with postgresql"'.
Rather obvious isn't it?
Shridhar
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marek Lewczuk | 2003-11-26 08:21:25 | Re: PostgreSQL is much faster than MySQL, only when... |
| Previous Message | Randolf Richardson | 2003-11-26 04:18:40 | Re: Another cool program that uses postgresql |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | cnliou | 2003-11-26 06:14:05 | TIMEZONE not working? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-11-26 05:39:27 | Re: performance versus order of fields in row |