Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Marcus Börger wrote: >> At 03:52 30.05.2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: >> >> From my expirience postgres is slower if you use referential integrity >> (what you should do) >> but this you cannot do in mysql (and therefore it is some kind of data >> storage but not a real rdbms). >> Just to correct the misinformation:
http://www.mysql.com/doc/S/E/SEC446.html The difference is that in MySQL you don't have to use a table handler that supports referential integrity, row-level locking, or MVCC. In a table that just handles sessions, that is probably preferable. > PostgreSQL support transaction and row level lock, > while MySQL supports lock or page level rocks. (3.x) > Besides, MySQL manual states that it does not perform > well when insert and update is concurrently performed. > A-I 1.4 (which is the case for session management) > As I mentioned, MySQL does support row-level locking, transactions, etc. Please people, let's stop spreading the FUD of yesteryear about MySQL. In any case, the major performance hits for MyISAM tables in MySQL (which both of you seem to be referring to) come when you do selects that take a long time on tables that are updated a lot. That isn't the case with a session table -- all selects are one well-indexed row. -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
