From: | "Gary Doades" <gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL and Linux 2.6 kernel. |
Date: | 2004-04-04 09:00:10 |
Message-ID: | 406FDCAA.30459.24B450F@localhost |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Unfortunately I have to try and keep both SQLServer and PostgreSQL
compatibilty. Our main web application is currently SQLServer, but we
want to migrate customers who don't care what the DB server is over to
PostgreSQL. Some of our larger customers demand SQLServer, you
know how it is!
I don't want to maintain two sets of code or SQL, so I am trying to find
common ground. The code is not a problem, but the SQL sometimes is.
Cheers,
Gary.
On 3 Apr 2004 at 17:43, Aaron Werman wrote:
> Almost any cross dbms migration shows a drop in performance. The engine
> effectively trains developers and administrators in what works and what
> doesn't. The initial migration thus compares a tuned to an untuned version.
>
> /Aaron
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
> To: "Gary Doades" <gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk>; <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 1:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] PostgreSQL and Linux 2.6 kernel.
>
>
> > Gary,
> >
> > > There are no indexes on the columns involved in the update, they are
> > > not required for my usual select statements. This is an attempt to
> > > slightly denormalise the design to get the performance up comparable
> > > to SQL Server 2000. We hope to move some of our databases over to
> > > PostgreSQL later in the year and this is part of the ongoing testing.
> > > SQLServer's query optimiser is a bit smarter that PostgreSQL's (yet)
> > > so I am hand optimising some of the more frequently used
> > > SQL and/or tweaking the database design slightly.
> >
> > Hmmm ... that hasn't been my general experience on complex queries.
> However,
> > it may be due to a difference in ANALYZE statistics. I'd love to see you
> > increase your default_stats_target, re-analyze, and see if PostgreSQL gets
> > "smarter".
> >
> > --
> > -Josh Berkus
> > Aglio Database Solutions
> > San Francisco
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
> >
>
>
> --
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com)
> Version: 7.0.230 / Virus Database: 262.6.5 - Release Date: 31/03/2004
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Paul Thomas | 2004-04-04 09:41:33 | Re: PostgreSQL and Linux 2.6 kernel. |
Previous Message | Gary Doades | 2004-04-04 08:56:34 | Re: PostgreSQL and Linux 2.6 kernel. |