Re: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
Hi! First of all, if I decide to benchmark MySQL vs. PostgreSQL with my application, PostgreSQL will probably be faster. That does not mean that MySQL is generally slower or that I *want* it to look slower. That just means 1) I have no experience in tuning MySQL 2) My application was built with another DBMS in mind Well, after installation and moving my MySQL dbs into PostgreSQL I decided to check if PostgreSQL is as fast as MySQL is. I was shocked... I have made several tests with simple and complicated querys - select, update, insert, drop. PostgreSQL execute those querys even 20 times slower than MySQL. On average, PostgreSQL is 2-3 times slower. Well, while 2-3 times slower looks believable, 20 times slower looks like there is something wrong with your tests. 1) Have you run ANALYZE / VACUUM ANALYZE after loading the data into Postgres? If you didn't do this, its optimizer will be unable to choose the correct query plan as it does not have real statistics. 2) Did you run with default postgresql.conf? That has *very* conservative settings for memory usage. Here is SQLite's benchmark page: http://www.sqlite.org/speed.html It boasts that the thing is 10-20 times faster than PostgreSQL, but this is with *default* configuration, while tuned PostgreSQL (there is a link on the page: http://www.sergeant.org/sqlite_vs_pgsync.html) works considerably faster. So, all people who needs trigers/views/procedures etc. have to be patient and wait for new MySQL versions. And don't you dare switching!!! :] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
MySQL has posted a very interesting comparison on their website. It appears to be a reasonably fair evaluation. PostgreSQL was faster than MySQL in some areas and MySQL was faster than PostgreSQL in most areas. For speed with all of that functionality, I'd be more inclined to look at DB2 rather than MSSQL since DB2 actually has security. :-) Curtis On Monday 14 July 2003 09:35, Jim Smith wrote: I agree with your opinion in 100%, but in my case I need DBMS with features like subselectes/utf-8/stored procedures but the speed is also very important issue. You might have to spend money! You are saying that there is DBMS with all this features and it is as fast as MySQL ? I don't know, but if there is, it is one you will have to pay for. In any case, speed is as much a matter of application design as a DBMS characteristic. As a minor side issue, we did some _very limited_ testing with MS SQLServer 2000 using unicode v ascii queries. Using unicode, queries tended to run at about half the speed compare to using ascii. This was client server, so it is likely that the increased network traffic is to blame, but bear it it mind. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
Marek Lewczuk wrote: For everyone who thinks about moving from MySQL to PostgreSQL I have a realy bad news - It's not worth. That's a bit of an overstatement! Why, You may ask... A few days ago I have installed and tested PostgreSQL, becouse I realy need UTF-8 support and subselects. I thought that PostgreSQL will be as good as MySQL but also will give me that features, Optimist! I was shocked... I have made several tests with simple and complicated querys - select, update, insert, drop. PostgreSQL execute those querys even 20 times slower than MySQL. On average, PostgreSQL is 2-3 times slower. Which is *fine* for many applications, although not all. So, all people who needs trigers/views/procedures etc. have to be patient and wait for new MySQL versions. If maximum speed is critical. It's easy to lose sight of the fact that speed is not the only criterion in choosing a DBMS. Features, stability, security, and so on can be just as important or more so. No single DBMS is going to win all the prizes; the trick is to find the one with the right balance. Bruce Feist -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
If maximum speed is critical. It's easy to lose sight of the fact that speed is not the only criterion in choosing a DBMS. Features, stability, security, and so on can be just as important or more so. No single DBMS is going to win all the prizes; the trick is to find the one with the right balance. I agree with your opinion in 100%, but in my case I need DBMS with features like subselectes/utf-8/stored procedures but the speed is also very important issue. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
which PostgreSQL version have you testet? If you want compare MySQL and PostgreSQL, than you have to use InnoDB tables. Tests with MyISAM make no sense. Out J2EE Application is working woth PostgreSQL 7.3.3 and MySQL 4.0.13 with InnoDB tables (we need transactions and referencial integrity). and the performance is at moment the same. But we have unoptimized PostgreSQL version. I was testing MySQL 4.0.13 with InnoDB tables and PostgreSQL 7.3.3. Rafal -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
Very smart your opinion, I agree at all with you. -Mensaje original- De: Bruce Feist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviado el: Monday, July 14, 2003 5:37 AM Para: MySQL List Asunto: Re: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test Marek Lewczuk wrote: For everyone who thinks about moving from MySQL to PostgreSQL I have a realy bad news - It's not worth. That's a bit of an overstatement! Why, You may ask... A few days ago I have installed and tested PostgreSQL, becouse I realy need UTF-8 support and subselects. I thought that PostgreSQL will be as good as MySQL but also will give me that features, Optimist! I was shocked... I have made several tests with simple and complicated querys - select, update, insert, drop. PostgreSQL execute those querys even 20 times slower than MySQL. On average, PostgreSQL is 2-3 times slower. Which is *fine* for many applications, although not all. So, all people who needs trigers/views/procedures etc. have to be patient and wait for new MySQL versions. If maximum speed is critical. It's easy to lose sight of the fact that speed is not the only criterion in choosing a DBMS. Features, stability, security, and so on can be just as important or more so. No single DBMS is going to win all the prizes; the trick is to find the one with the right balance. Bruce Feist -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
If maximum speed is critical. It's easy to lose sight of the fact that speed is not the only criterion in choosing a DBMS. Features, stability, security, and so on can be just as important or more so. No single DBMS is going to win all the prizes; the trick is to find the one with the right balance. I agree with your opinion in 100%, but in my case I need DBMS with features like subselectes/utf-8/stored procedures but the speed is also very important issue. You might have to spend money! -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
I agree with your opinion in 100%, but in my case I need DBMS with features like subselectes/utf-8/stored procedures but the speed is also very important issue. You might have to spend money! You are saying that there is DBMS with all this features and it is as fast as MySQL ? -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
I agree with your opinion in 100%, but in my case I need DBMS with features like subselectes/utf-8/stored procedures but the speed is also very important issue. You might have to spend money! You are saying that there is DBMS with all this features and it is as fast as MySQL ? I don't know, but if there is, it is one you will have to pay for. In any case, speed is as much a matter of application design as a DBMS characteristic. As a minor side issue, we did some _very limited_ testing with MS SQLServer 2000 using unicode v ascii queries. Using unicode, queries tended to run at about half the speed compare to using ascii. This was client server, so it is likely that the increased network traffic is to blame, but bear it it mind. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
I agree with your opinion in 100%, but in my case I need DBMS with features like subselectes/utf-8/stored procedures but the speed is also very important issue. You might have to spend money! You are saying that there is DBMS with all this features and it is as fast as MySQL ? I don't know, but if there is, it is one you will have to pay for. In any case, speed is as much a matter of application design as a DBMS characteristic. As a minor side issue, we did some _very limited_ testing with MS SQLServer 2000 using unicode v ascii queries. Using unicode, queries tended to run at about half the speed compare to using ascii. This was client server, so it is likely that the increased network traffic is to blame, but bear it it mind. IPv6 is coming soon and PostgreSQL 7.4 will be the 1st database IPv6-ready! This oportunity give to us the choice to move on to IPv6 network environment. I do believe (tested in my network 6to4 connection) this move can improve the environment performance until 18% in all! Some moves can Checkmate! Robson Oliveira -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MySQL vs. PostgreSql -- speed test
When I benchmarked PostgreSql against MySql for my application, MySql was 15 times faster, so 18% wouldn't make much difference for me! Andy -Original Message- From: Robson Oliveira [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 July 2003 15:35 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test I agree with your opinion in 100%, but in my case I need DBMS with features like subselectes/utf-8/stored procedures but the speed is also very important issue. You might have to spend money! You are saying that there is DBMS with all this features and it is as fast as MySQL ? I don't know, but if there is, it is one you will have to pay for. In any case, speed is as much a matter of application design as a DBMS characteristic. As a minor side issue, we did some _very limited_ testing with MS SQLServer 2000 using unicode v ascii queries. Using unicode, queries tended to run at about half the speed compare to using ascii. This was client server, so it is likely that the increased network traffic is to blame, but bear it it mind. IPv6 is coming soon and PostgreSQL 7.4 will be the 1st database IPv6-ready! This oportunity give to us the choice to move on to IPv6 network environment. I do believe (tested in my network 6to4 connection) this move can improve the environment performance until 18% in all! Some moves can Checkmate! Robson Oliveira -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL -- speed test
As a minor side issue, we did some _very limited_ testing with MS SQLServer 2000 using unicode v ascii queries. Using unicode, queries tended to run at about half the speed compare to using ascii. This was client server, so it is likely that the increased network traffic is to blame, but bear it it mind. Actually, Unicode is much more difficult to handle than the small character encoding sets. Some slowdown is probably to be expected. -- Joel Rees, programmer, Kansai Systems Group Altech Corporation (Alpsgiken), Osaka, Japan http://www.alpsgiken.co.jp -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
