Re: [SQL] benchmarks

2000-10-29 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]


MTcW: 

Pick the database which allows your programmers
to get the job done. If the system is too slow, find out
if there are ways you could speed it up, and then if that
doesn't make you happy, get a faster server.

In my opinion it's not worth making the programmer's life
more difficult to go with a database which is difficult to
work with.

Also, make sure the database you choose is reliable.
One of the mySQL, mSQL (I confuse the two) servers has
the problem that they lock the entire db when working, 
so only one client can connect at a time. Seems like
a problem to me.


Troy


> 
> 
> hi all,
> 
> lately at work there has been a debate over
> mysql versus postgres
> 
> im just looking for independent benchmarks
> 
> i personally love postgres 
> at work they like mysql
> 
> currently we are investigating other possible db solutions
> 
> and they are looking at oracle, i think we could save a lot of dollarsz 
> if we decided to go to postgres
> 
> 
> i was wondering if anyone can share links to  any current independent
> benchmarks 
> 
> as i would like some real data on these 
> 
> or at the very least give me a how to so i can do my own testing!
> 
> thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 




RE: [SQL] benchmarks

2000-10-29 Thread Edmar Wiggers


> The results were that PgSQL was slower than MySQL only by a
> factor of 2 or 3
> (say, 3 seconds for MySQL against 6 or 8 seconds for PgSQL).
> Pretty good in
> my opinion.

I forgot to stress that the test was run using *MySQL* benchmark tools,
connecting against MySQL and PostgreSQL. I had to optimize the tools to
suite PgSQL, because for some reason :) MySQL folks didn't bother to.




[SQL] pgsql-sql list should now work again ...

2000-10-29 Thread The Hermit Hacker



Marc G. Fournier   ICQ#7615664   IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org