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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 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
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
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
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
12 matches
Mail list logo
