From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Randal L(dot) Schwartz" <merlyn(at)stonehenge(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: fairly current mysql v postgresql comparison need for |
Date: | 2003-03-24 18:24:53 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0303241122590.23224-100000@css120.ihs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 24 Mar 2003, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
> I'm getting beaten up by the mysql users around me because they claim
> that MySQL 4.x with InnoDB solves all of the ACID problems, so Pg no
> longer pulls clearly ahead.
>
> Has anyone examined this closely so that I have some nice things to
> say about Pg instead?
>
> Also, has anyone done a MySQL 4.x v Pg 7.{2,3}.x comparison recently?
> All of the comparisons I saw in google were older.
Try this one:
Setup a postgresql database. Make sure fsync is on (the default.)
Make sure you're using a journaling file system, like ext3 or xfs for your
data.
Initiate 100 simultaneous transactions (pgbench works well for this.)
Pull the plug while they are running. Turn your machine back on. Check
the consistency of your database. It should be ok after recovery.
Do the same to MySQL.
Repeat the above tests over and over. Contrast and compare.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-03-24 18:25:37 | Re: fairly current mysql v postgresql comparison need for |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2003-03-24 18:21:48 | Re: Please clarify with regard to Renaming a Sequence |