At 02:17 AM 12/12/98 -0800, Tauren Mills wrote:
>I'd highly recommend taking a look at MySQL. www.mysql.com
>
>I'm using RedHat 5.2, JRun 2.2.1, and MySQL with type 4 JDBC drivers. The
>database and JDBC drivers are free. The database is faster than anything
>else I've seen, including the big ones like Oracle, MS SQL, Informix, etc.
This discussion really belongs on a database forum but here goes...
Regarding performance of mySQL vs. Oracle or Informix;
I hate to throw water on your fire but the real database engines (MS SQL is
*not* one of them) use raw disk space and run on *real* unix systems with
I/O subsystems capable of 80+ MB/s sustained transfer rates. We've worked
with Informix engines supporting 250 simultaneous users on databases
exceeding 100GB. I don't think its fair to even talk about comparing mySQL
to a mature, commercial database engine.
When trying to determine how a database engine might perform under a heavy
load, one of the first questions you might ask is "does it use raw or
cooked disk space?". If it uses cooked disk space (i.e. files in the
filesytem), it will be significantly slower than a similarly well designed
system that uses raw disk space. By eliminating the unnecessary
file-access calls through the O/S, the overhead of I/O is reduced. Also,
nothing can replace a *fast* SCSI subsystem. Don't even bother with IDE.
Regardless of what they say about throughput, the IDE interface requires
constant management by your CPU and doesn't allow overlapping I/O (most
SCSI controllers allow 255+ concurrent I/O operations). In my experience,
a slow SCSI subsystem on a heavily loaded system will outperform the best IDE.
I am working intensively with postgreSQL. It has a rather rich set of
features but it isn't ANSI compliant (yet). The documentation needs some
work. After writing some complex triggers and external functions, I think
I am going to write some HOWTO's and submit them to the postgres project team.
Douglas Toltzman
http://www.oakstrsft.com/
