Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)

On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> The hacker community has a wide range of interests.
For sure, but there will be a raodmap with general consensus of the
hackers.

> From my POV, the overall performance of PostgreSQL is more than
> competitive with other database products, including M$SQL.
I never doubt you point of view, but it hardly counts as an
argument for my current problem. There is a technical reason
why MS SQL server is faster here and they claim to do it safely.
(Well personally I do not give a cent for thigs that MS claims
about but this does not help here.)

> There is not much point in arguing a specific query case,
It is no specific query case. It is the speed of an index scan which
goes like N if you do it with PostgreSQL and it goes like log N if
you do not have to look back into the table like MS SQL server does.

> though we are happy to talk
> about specific overall applications and to offer suggestions on how to
> build databases that are generally well designed and that will perform
> well on more than one product.
I doubt that you could care about any database designer who does
poor database design and just does a straigtforeward index scan.
If you think that PostgreSQL is only targeted to high professional
database designers which know how to avoid index scans I doubt that
PostgreSQL will get the user base it would deserve.
I could imagine several cases like my colleague who might think about
porting their application and get into the trap as me that the first
simple question they try performs that badly. I really want to say
that we should address this issue in the documentation. If there
exists such cases we should make it clear *why* PostgreSQL fails
this performance test (and perhaps include your text in your mail
as a base of this documentation). If we ignore that we will not
attrakt users.

> If you have a colleague who firmly believes that M$SQL is the best
> solution, it sounds like he is not listening to all of the facts.
He is a little bit MS centric but in principle knows the advantage
of OpenSource. On the other hand he is led by pragmatism and just
asks: Which software gives the solution quickly. And he found his
answer.
On the other hand we should also listen to things he presents as
"facts" ...

> That certainly can be frustrating, eh?
Yes.

> Maybe after a few more years of
> crashed machines and increasing costs he will be more open to
> alternatives ;)
This does not help currently.
I repeat: We should at least upgrade PostgreSQL documentation to address
those issues.

Kind regards

Andreas.

PS: I prefer not to be CCed if I do not explicite ask for this service.
It seems to be common habit on PostgreSQL lists to CC users. Does
this make any sense? On many other lists such bahaviour is banned.