Thank you.
I came to the same conclusion on mySQL after only reading about it's
comparative benchmarks and that's why I choose it.
By their own admission mySQL developers have concentrated their effort
on speed but I wondered about real life situations. I wondered if those
benchmarks where doctored to make mySQL appear convincingly faster. I
think I have my answer now.
Regards
Yves
Christopher Ostmo wrote:
> Matthew Loff pressed the little lettered thingies in this order...
>
>
>>I realize this is off-topic a bit... I also use MySQL for all
>>database-related projects...
>>
>>Does anyone have any comments on benchmarks of the new beta of
>>PostgreSQL vs. MySQL? Postgres appears staggeringly faster in the
>>benchmarks I've seen, but I don't hear much about it, so I'm naturally
>>skeptical.
>>
>>
>
> I can't comment on the beta Postgres, but I'm using 7.1.2 (the latest
> stable release) for light in-house use and it is MUCH slower than
> MySQL in almost every category.
>
> I use Postgres for a few functions that gather a lot of data and I don't
> want that data slowing down my MySQL server. As an example of just
> one of the speed differences, I had the data saving to both the
> PostgreSQL server and the MySQL server (same physical machine) for
> a short time. I had collected about 10,000 records in one table.
> Deleting those records (DELETE * FROM table) in MySQL took less
> than a second (MySQL destroys the table and recreates when you use
> this command). The Postgress server took more than 10 minutes. As
> a test, I recreated the data and deleted it in MySQL using "DELETE
> FROM TABLE WHERE idfield LIKE '%%' (this causes MySQL to delete
> records one at a time). It took about 7 seconds.
>
> Every time I've done a comparison between the two on operations
> involving large amounts of data, MySQL has come out ahead AT LEAST
> five-fold. In many cases, it has come out much better than that.
>
> I'm admittedly not a big hardware performance expert, but I'm pretty
> good with SQL and SQL optimization.
>
> I also use PostgreSQL for the things that it does that MySQL does not
> (commit/rollback mostly), but as of the 3.23.39, MySQL supports
> transactions and it will support sub selects in the near future. Those
> are the two missing features for which MySQL has taken nearly all of its
> criticism. I don't think that I've heard anyone argue about it's raw speed
> (when used properly of course).
>
> Please don't take this as an anit-PostgreSQL message! I really like the
> database server and I continue to use it. The fact of the matter is that in
> a side-by-side comparison for nearly anything you could conceive of
> doing with data storage/retrieval on the web, MySQL is going to have a
> decided speed advantage.
>
> This may change with the new release of Postgres.
>
> Christopher Ostmo
> a.k.a. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> AppIdeas.com
> Innovative Application Ideas
> Meeting cutting edge dynamic
> web site needs since the
> dawn of Internet time (1995)
>
> For a good time,
> http://www.AppIdeas.com/
>
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
