>
> What makes PostgreSQL more interesting? Because you use it perhaps?
> I would hesitate a guess that Mysql is a very common workload
> under FreeBSD likely more so than PostgreSQL and as such that
> would be a very good reason for it to have particular interest
> and hence focus as a good start
Thank you, Robert.
P.
On Monday 26 February 2007 15:52, Robert Watson wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> After on-and-off development since 2005, I've now merged the UNIX domain
> socket locking patch. Special thanks to Kris Kennaway who has been
> providing stability testing, performance testing, and gener
Dear all,
After on-and-off development since 2005, I've now merged the UNIX domain
socket locking patch. Special thanks to Kris Kennaway who has been providing
stability testing, performance testing, and general support and feedback for
this project since inception.
Please let me know if y
Andrew Hammond wrote:
Performance is a pretty weak reason to upgrade, unless of course you
have a performance problem. The one thing that will really push me to
upgrade is bug fixes to stuff that I use where the risk of exposure to
the bug outweighs the risk and cost of upgrade.
This may be the
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 09:36:44AM -0800, Andrew Hammond wrote:
> Would you guys mind
> graphing the relative performance of PostgreSQL on 6.2-RELEASE and
> your patched version please?
postgresql currently performs worse than mysql on SMP freeBSD systems
for the reason I posted yesterday (thunde
Andrew Hammond wrote:
> Performance is a pretty weak reason to upgrade, unless of course you
> have a performance problem.
> P.S. I know this is kinda trollish, but I don't understand the
> interest in MySQL as a load,
I agree in general, but MySQL performance is very exposed as an advocacy
is
On 2/25/07, Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
How does that compare to 6.2-RELEASE performance?
>>> Much better. Fixing filedesc locking was key.
>>>
>>>
>> If there is extra cycles on the same hardware, a performance comparison
>> graph would be great.
>
> Se
