Linux(Debian) + Java + PostgreSQL = Fastest
2005/7/8, Mark Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 16:43 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > * PFC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > For Python it's the reverse : the MySQL driver is slow and dumb,
> > > and the postgres driv
On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 16:43 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * PFC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > For Python it's the reverse : the MySQL driver is slow and dumb,
> > and the postgres driver (psycopg 2) is super fast, handles all
> > quoting,
> > and knows about type conversions, i
* PFC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For Python it's the reverse : the MySQL driver is slow and dumb,
> and the postgres driver (psycopg 2) is super fast, handles all
> quoting,
> and knows about type conversions, it will automatically convert a
> Python List into a postgres Arra
My tests included using aqua studios connection to both databases and
.asp
page using odbc connections.
Performance also depends a lot on the driver.
For instance, the PHP driver for MySQL is very very fast. It is also very
dumb, as it returns everything as a string and doesn't kn
Ron Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Christopher Browne wrote:
>> There is a common "use case" where MySQL(tm) ...
>> select * from some_table where id='some primary key value';
> However this is a quite common use-case; and I wonder what the
> best practices for postgresql is for applications
s of the original message, including attachments.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jan Wieck
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 1:55 PM
To: PFC
Cc: Amit V Shah; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Need help to decide Mysq
On 6/6/2005 2:12 PM, PFC wrote:
Please pardon my ignorance, but from whatever I had heard, mysql was
supposedly always faster than postgres Thats why I was so surprised
!!
I heard a lot of this too, so much it seems common wisdom that postgres
is slow... well maybe some old version
Christopher Browne wrote:
There is a common "use case" where MySQL(tm) ...
select * from some_table where id='some primary key value';
If your usage patterns differ from that...
However this is a quite common use-case; and I wonder what the
best practices for postgresql is for applications
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 08:25:08PM +0300, Tobias Brox wrote:
> [Jeffrey Tenny - Mon at 11:51:22AM -0400]
> > There are some pitfalls to pgsql though, especially for existing SQL
> > code using MAX and some other things which can really be blindsided
> > (performance-wise) by pgsql if you don't us
Please pardon my ignorance, but from whatever I had heard, mysql was
supposedly always faster than postgres Thats why I was so surprised
!!
I heard a lot of this too, so much it seems common wisdom that postgres
is slow... well maybe some old version was, but it's getting better at
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Amit V Shah) wrote:
>> I am all for postgres at this point, however just want to know why I am
>> getting opposite results !!! Both DBs are on the same machine
>
>> Why do you say "opposite results" ?
>
> Please pardon my ignorance, but from wha
[Jeffrey Tenny - Mon at 11:51:22AM -0400]
> There are some pitfalls to pgsql though, especially for existing SQL
> code using MAX and some other things which can really be blindsided
> (performance-wise) by pgsql if you don't use the workarounds.
Yes, I discovered that - "select max(num_attr)" d
postgres -> returns results in 2.8 seconds
What kind of plan does it do ? seq scan on the big tables and hash join
on the small tables ?
mysql -> takes around 16 seconds (This is with myisam ... with
innodb it takes 220 seconds)
I'm not surprised at all.
Try the same Jo
> I am all for postgres at this point, however just want to know why I am
> getting opposite results !!! Both DBs are on the same machine
> Why do you say "opposite results" ?
Please pardon my ignorance, but from whatever I had heard, mysql was
supposedly always faster than postgres Th
l
load situation than with a single user, single query situation.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeffrey Tenny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 11:51 AM
> To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Need help to decide Mysql vs Postgres
>
&
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 12:00:08PM -0400, Amit V Shah wrote:
> I made a schema with 5 tables. I have a master data table with foreign keys
> pointing to other 4 tables. Master data table has around 4 million records.
> When I run a select joining it with the baby tables,
>
> postgres -> returns
posite results !!! Both DBs are on the same machine
Thanks,
Amit
-Original Message-
From: Jeffrey Tenny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 11:51 AM
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Need help to decide Mysql vs Postgres
Re: your JDBC wishes: Co
Re: your JDBC wishes: Consider IBM Cloudscape (now Apache Derby) too,
which has an apache license. It's all pure java and it's easy to get going.
As to MySql vs Postgres: license issues aside, if you have
transactionally complex needs (multi-table updates, etc), PostgreSQL
wins hands down in
If you want something more "embedded" in your application, you could
consider :
http://firebird.sourceforge.net/
http://hsqldb.sourceforge.net/
http://sqlite.org/
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose
So, our problem in installing is we don't know a cluster or SSL from a
hole in the ground. Things get confusing about contexts- are we
talking about a user of the system or the database? Yikes, do I need
to write down the 30+ character autogenerated password?
No you don't need to write it do
A consultant did a project for us and chose MySQL. We thought it was
cool that MySQL was free.
Turns out, MySQL costs over $500 (USD) if you are a commercial
organization like us! Even worse, we have to formally transfer
licenses to customers and any further transfers must include
involvement o
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Josh Berkus wrote:
>So transaction integrity is not a real concern?
I know of all too many people that consider that to be
true. They simply don't understand the problem.
--
http://www.spinics.net/linux/
---(end of broadcast)---
Thanks for the prompt reply !! Actually migration is inevitable. We have a
totally messed up schema, not normalized and stuff like that. So the goal
of
the migration is to get a new and better normalized schema. That part is
done already. Now the decision point is, should we go with postgres or
t: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 1:15 PM
To: Amit V Shah
Cc: 'pgsql-performance@postgresql.org'
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Need help to decide Mysql vs Postgres
I am not trying to start a mysql vs postgres war so please dont
misunderstand me I tried to look around for mysql vs postgres
articles
It's common knowledge, it seems, that MySQL without transactions will be
a lot faster than Postgres on Inserts. And on Updates too, that is, unless
you have more than a few concurrent concurrent connections, at which point
the MySQL full table lock will just kill everything. And you don't
Amit,
> I took a look at this. I have a few concerns with bizgres though -- I am
> using jetspeed portal engine and Hibernate as my O/R Mapping layer. I know
> for sure that they dont support bizgres. Now the question is what
> difference is there between bizgres and postgres ... I guess I will tr
On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 01:56:54PM -0400, Amit V Shah wrote:
> I took a look at this. I have a few concerns with bizgres though -- I am
> using jetspeed portal engine and Hibernate as my O/R Mapping layer.
If you have problems with performance, you might want to look into using JDBC
directly inste
> - Most of the DB usage is Selects. We would have some inserts but that
> would be like a nightly or a monthly process
So transaction integrity is not a real concern? This sounds like a data
warehouse; wanna try Bizgres? (www.bizgres.org)
I took a look at this. I have a few concerns with biz
Amit,
> - We have lot of foreign keys between the tables
Do you need these keys to be enforced? Last I checked, MySQL was still
having trouble with foriegn keys.
> - Most of the DB usage is Selects. We would have some inserts but that
> would be like a nightly or a monthly process
So transac
ilto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Amit V Shah
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 12:22 PM
To: 'Joshua D. Drake'
Cc: 'pgsql-performance@postgresql.org'
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Need help to decide Mysql vs Postgres
Hi Josh,
Thanks for the prompt reply !! Actually migration is inevitable. We
postgres or
mysql.
Thanks,
Amit
-Original Message-
From: Joshua D. Drake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 1:15 PM
To: Amit V Shah
Cc: 'pgsql-performance@postgresql.org'
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Need help to decide Mysql vs Postgres
>
> I am not trying
I am not trying to start a mysql vs postgres war so please dont
misunderstand me I tried to look around for mysql vs postgres articles,
but most of them said mysql is better in speed. However those articles were
very old so I dont know about recent stage. Please comment !!!
It is my experi
Hi all,
>From whatever reading and surfing I have done, I have found that postgres is
good. Actually I myself am a fan of postgres as compared to mysql. However I
want to have some frank opinions before I decide something. Following are
some of the aspects of my schema, and our concerns --
- We
33 matches
Mail list logo