| From: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bill Moran <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL vs MySQL, and FreeBSD |
| Date: | 2007-11-09 19:44:04 |
| Message-ID: | 4734B884.9080501@cheapcomplexdevices.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Bill Moran wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 11:11:18 -0500 (EST)
> Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Nov 2007, Sebastian Hennebrueder wrote:
>>> If the queries are complex, this is understable.
>> The queries used for this comparison are trivial. There's only one table
>> involved and there are no joins. It's testing very low-level aspects of
>> performance.
>
> Actually, what it's really showing is parallelism, and I've always
> expected PostgreSQL to come out on top in that arena.
Isn't it showing Postgres winning even without parallelism.
At 1 threads, Postgres looks like 800TPS where MysQL comes
in at about 600TPS on their Opteron charts.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bill Moran | 2007-11-09 20:08:09 | Re: work_mem and shared_buffers |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2007-11-09 19:24:56 | Re: work_mem and shared_buffers |