Dear Kevin -
Kevin Pratt writes:
>
> "IMO - mysql is just a disaster you are inviting on yourself.
Isn't there some line about everyone having an opinion...
> you should see the responses to some recent bug reports ...
>
> We have run load tests ourselves, and postgres performs much the same under
> heavy load as no load, whereas mysql quickly gets slow and then just starts
> erroring out past a certain point.
This is a strange comment. Ignoring for the moment the relative
advantages or disadvantages of MySQL and Postgres they seem to say
that "heavy load" doesn't impact Postgres' performance. So if we pin
the CPU by doing random disk reads it doesn't slow down database
functionality? Come on, that's just silly.
> We have had ihtml/postgres/odbc pooling working well under huge loads
> during our tests, where mysql could not compete at all. Furthermore
> postgres has a far richer set of functionality mysql users can only dream
> about.
The broader feature set of Postgres over MySQL doesn't get a lot of
intelligent rebuttal. However this is the first time I've ever heard
someone claim that Postgres is faster. Will you provide some more
detail regarding your "huge loads" and "tests"?
Yours (curious now) - Billy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
