On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 01:27, Aaron Stone wrote: > Tom Ivar Helbekkmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > [snip]... while PostgreSQL totally whipped MySQL once the > > going got tough -- it's built to handle complex queries, and it's also > > built to withstand the pressure of many simultaneous users. MySQL is > > not, and takes a really bad performance hit when loaded down. The > > main reason for this is very primitive locking algorithms in MySQL. > > Which is exactly why InnoDB uses row locking rather than table locking. > InnoDB tables are available by default in MySQL 4.0 and I believe that > they *are* the default in 4.1 and higher (e.g. 5.0 development).
I do not think dbmail should have any kind of specific (by default) support for mysql 4.1 in the stable releases. It is after all Gamma version, not even Alpha yet. Same goes for any other software that has not reached a feature/api freeze yet. It is therefore not much use to benchmark non-stable versions to decide what is best for a production environment. Even Beta and RC releases may have minor/major bugs that affect performance either way, or even lacking proper locking. This can result in better or worse performance, but almost always less stability. Another thing to consider is what todays distributions offer, an end user might not want to compile mysql/pgsql from scratch. (yes RPM's might exist). Fedora/Redhat still uses mysql 3. -=Dead2=-
