Re: Is there a meaningful benchmark?

On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:26 PM, John Cheng <chonger(dot)cheng(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > Comparison between MySQL using the MyISAM engine with PostgreSQL is
> really
> > not sensible. For one, the MyISAM engine does not have transaction and
> > foreign key support, while PostgreSQL supports transaction and foreign
> key.
> > Would anyone really give up transaction and integrity for slightly more
> > performance?
>
> Sure, if the application fit. If I have to load 100Meg files into a
> db, run some simple extraction on them, and output it back out, and
> can recreate all my data at the drop of a hat, then mysql / myisam
> might be a good match.

Right . There will be situations where MySQL with MyISAM will be a good fit.
My point was more that it doesn't make sense to simply compare "speed"
becuase other things needs to be taken into account.

>
> I am no a fan of MySQL, more because the company behind it seems to be
> lost and drifting than the db itself. Bugs that are 5 years old
> finally getting fixed after Monty chided them in december? Come on,
> PostgreSQL comes out with a near bug free new version every 1 to 2
> years. PostgreSQL stomps bugs in hours or days that MySQL AB takes
> YEARS to fix, and then get reintroduced (see the order by on innodb
> indexed field debacle for that story) and I just don't trust the
> company or the db for anything complex. But as a tool it has some
> uses that it's good enough at I could use it if I had to.
>

--
- John L Cheng