Re: more anti-postgresql FUD

> -----Original Message-----
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> >> * MySQL is used as a primary development platform.
>
> > Another good reason.
>
> Actually that's *the* reason --- it's always going to be hard for
> Postgres to look good for an application that's been
designed/optimized
> for MySQL. The application has already made whatever compromises it
> had to for that platform, and dropping it onto a different DB won't
> magically undo them.
>
> Some days I think database independence is a myth.

We were looking to improve our session performance, so I did a basic
test of using mysql 4.0 innodb vs postgres 8.1. The test did a simple
retrieve, update, save; 1 time per page. mysql was stock, pg had a
shared_buffers and a couple of other standard tweaks done. ab was used
to provide the load. server was an old dell pe2450 with 640mb of ram.
tables were simple and a single primary key-foreign key relationship
between them.

pg was not only faster, it scaled to higher concurrency and had more
predictable response times. mysql nosed over at around 5 concurrent
connections. pg went to somewhere around 15.

the more I read, the more it seems that mysql speed is a myth. it may
be faster for simple flat-text sort of operations with one or two
concurrent users where the app maintains RI, validates all data, and
handles all of the complex joins. it just doesn't seem to scale up as
well as pg.

--
-Jacob