We all know the performance gap between PostgreSQL and MySQL can't possibly be 200% so this impossibility can be extrapolated to the performance gap with the REAL SQL Server.
I don't doubt that they ran a suite of tests and got those numbers. The questions surround the details of the test. For MySQL: MyISAM or InnoDB? For all: what are the field types? How are the indexes setup? What are the cache and other performance settings? On what machine with what OS/CPU/RAM/motherboard/disk? Never bet that a speed gap is "impossible". Heck, after a review of the above details, we may even find the gap is valid, at least as far as very similar SQL operations go. For a while now I've been planning to migrate some clients to PostgreSQL. MySQL is just too "viral". People keep wondering when a new MySQL plugin will be available. Look at their license agreement. Either REAL has to reverse engineer the new features, or use the provided libraries and GNU RB, NOT an option. PostgreSQL is pretty robust, but if REAL can step up to the plate on databases, especially in regards to integration and the UI for administration, I'll certainly give their product a chance. And if it can turn in better times for one client who has queries that run into 15-20 minutes...I'm there. Daniel L. Taylor Taylor Design Computer Consulting & Software Development [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.taylor-design.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives of this list here: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
