I felt the world needed a new benchmark ;)
So : Forum style benchmark with simulation of many users posting and
viewing forums and topics on a PHP website.
http://home.peufeu.com/ftsbench/forum1.png
One of those curves is a very popular open-source database which claims
I assume red is PostgreSQL and green is MySQL. That reflects my own
benchmarks with those two.
But I don't fully understand what the graph displays. Does it reflect
the ability of the underlying database to support a certain amount of
users per second given a certain database size? Or is the
I assume red is PostgreSQL and green is MySQL. That reflects my own
benchmarks with those two.
Well, since you answered first, and right, you win XD
The little curve that dives into the ground is MySQL with InnoDB.
The Energizer bunny that keeps going is Postgres.
On 14-5-2007 0:00 jlmarin wrote:
I wanted to post this even if it's a bit late on the thread because
right now I have exactly this kind of problem.
We're trying to figure out if a dual-Quadcore (Xeon) will be better
(cost/benefit wise) than a 4-way Opteron dualcore, for *our* program.
We've
On 20-5-2007 19:09 PFC wrote:
Since I use lighttpd, I don't really care about the number of actual
slow clients (ie. real concurrent HTTP connections). Everything is
funneled through those 8 PHP processes, so postgres never sees huge
concurrency.
Well, that would only be in favour of
PFC [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The little curve that dives into the ground is MySQL with InnoDB.
The Energizer bunny that keeps going is Postgres.
Just for comparison's sake it would be interesting to see a curve for
mysql/myisam. Mysql's claim to speed is mostly based on
PFC írta:
I felt the world needed a new benchmark ;)
So : Forum style benchmark with simulation of many users posting
and viewing forums and topics on a PHP website.
http://home.peufeu.com/ftsbench/forum1.png
One of those curves is a very popular open-source database which
On Sun, 20 May 2007 19:26:38 +0200, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PFC [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The little curve that dives into the ground is MySQL with InnoDB.
The Energizer bunny that keeps going is Postgres.
Just for comparison's sake it would be interesting to see a
I'm writing a full report, but I'm having a
lot of problems with MySQL,
I'd like to give it a fair chance, but it shows
real obstination in NOT
working.
Well that matches up well with my experience, better even yet, file a
performance bug to the commercial support and you'll
Ralph Mason wrote:
We have a database running on a 4 processor machine. As time goes by
the IO gets worse and worse peeking at about 200% as the machine loads up.
The weird thing is that if we restart postgres it’s fine for hours but
over time it goes bad again.
(CPU usage graph here
You're not swapping are you? One explanation could be that PG is
configured to think it has access to a little more memory than the box
can really provide, which forces it to swap once it's been running for
long enough to fill up its shared buffers or after a certain number of
concurrent
Ralph Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ralph Mason wrote:
We have a database running on a 4 processor machine. As time goes by
the IO gets worse and worse peeking at about 200% as the machine loads up.
The weird thing is that if we restart postgres it's fine for hours but
over time it
Hi all,
I know we've covered this before but I'm having trouble with it today.
I have some geographic data in tables that I'm working with. I have a
country, state and city table. I was selecting the country_name out of the
country table but discovered that some countries (like Antarctica)
Ralph Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ralph Mason wrote:
We have a database running on a 4 processor machine. As time goes by
the IO gets worse and worse peeking at about 200% as the machine loads
up.
The weird thing is that if we restart postgres it's fine for hours but
over time it
14 matches
Mail list logo
