From: | Joe <svn(at)freedomcircle(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
Cc: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)alcove(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Comparative performance |
Date: | 2005-09-29 12:16:11 |
Message-ID: | 433BDB0B.8010002@freedomcircle.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> That actually depends a lot on *how* you use it. I've seen pg-on-windows
> deployments that come within a few percent of the linux performance.
> I've also seen those that are absolutely horrible compared.
>
> One sure way to kill the performance is to do a lot of small
> connections. Using persistent connection is even more important on
> Windows than it is on Unix. It could easily explain a difference like
> this.
I just tried using pg_pconnect() and I didn't notice any significant
improvement. What bothers me most is that with Postgres I tend to see jerky
behavior on almost every page: the upper 1/2 or 2/3 of the page is displayed
first and you can see a blank bottom (or you can see a half-filled completion
bar). With MySQL each page is generally displayed in one swoop.
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steinar H. Gunderson | 2005-09-29 12:30:30 | Re: Comparative performance |
Previous Message | Pailloncy Jean-Gerard | 2005-09-29 11:11:45 | Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort? |