-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Karsten Hilbert schreef: >> True, API persistence layer should be generic as said previously >> mentioned. Although originally it needs to be developed based on a >> reference DBMS and for this DB2 looks attractive (quick results?) on >> first sight. > Not any more than, say, PostgreSQL. Actually less so, some are likely to > argue.
DB benchmarking is very difficult and depending on many factors. Mostly this is done in various sub-functionalities. For example, MySQL knows two table-types and three index types, and maybe you can add third party software too. Also it runs on BSD, Linux, Windows, and maybe Mac (don't know, the last), and how may flavours of BSD and Linux and Windows are there, out there, and which filesystems are used, how do you connect, etc...... Here is an example of benchmarking: http://polepos.sourceforge.net/results/html/index.html Let's just say that most of the popular DB-engines do a good job, that is my experience. Not only speed is important, but also connectivity, availability, CPU-use, memory-use, ANSI-SQL-use, other features..... It depends on many factors which database suits best for your purpose. An important factor is the schema you use. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHfCinsr/NIrczD3MRAi1BAKCMY8v2QJo211NXKO7wAm5OMVR0sgCgsy/Y PIf3z5fcJGkQgSiGSad/QIs= =IVuw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
