Re: MS Access out-performs PostgreSQL 7?

In reponse to all of your replies,
It very well could be user error! Please understand that our test in
comparing access does not mean that access is our other choice, it just
happened to be available.
I have installed 7.0.2 from the website, it is not the version that comes
with redhat.
When I said access was "on the same server" I didn't mean it was actually
"running" under redhat, it is in fact just on the same drive as psql. This
was done to clear up communication/performance issues with the servers.
I am using ODBC to connect in my asp scripts, and I think this may be the
problem.
Maybe I need to try a different ODBC driver, or if anyone knows of a better
way to connect in asp scripts to psql, please let me know.
I would also like to note that if this was in a real world app, i would use
stored procedures for this, but since access cannot do this, it didnt do it
for this test.

I am a believer in Linux, and the open source revolution, and I didnt mean
for this to be one of those "NT vs Linux" posts!

Joe Sircy
Webmaster
dnhawaii.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gavin M. Roy" <gmr(at)readysetnet(dot)com>
To: "The Hermit Hacker" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: "Joseph Sircy" <webmaster(at)dnhawaii(dot)com>; "pgsql list"
<pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] MS Access out-performs PostgreSQL 7?

> Red Hat 6.2 isn't the best platform for speed either. You may want to
look at
> Slackware or Debian.
>
> Also such a blanket statement can be viewed as antagonistic. Access is
noted
> for being bloated, crappy, and slow. PostgresQL is not. I would say user
> error / ignorance may be the issue here.
>
> Also note that a Red Hat installed version of PostgresQL is not the same
as
> you downloading it, compiling it, and customizing it to your exact system.
If
> I were in your shoes I would do two things:
>
> 1) download 7.0.2, compile and install it.
> 2) make sure you're comparing apples to apples. Microsoft Access query
syntax
> isn't exactly the same as ANSI SQL (I believe this to be the case, I know
it
> is the case with SQL Server).
> 3) What types of queries are you doing, and how big is your database. If
> you're querying against 10 rows you may have one effect, vrs 10,000.
> 4) Seriously look at what your trying to do. Comparing a solution like
Access
> to PostgresQL is like comparing a Yugo to a Mercedes. Access has nice
tools
> and "features" but is a bloated piece.
>
> Gavin
>
> The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Joseph Sircy wrote:
> >
> > > I would like to know why access is outperforming pgsql in a simple
> > > database setup. I have the exact same databases, one in access, the
> > > other in pgsql, on the same server, a linux box running redhat 6.2.
> >
> > You can run MS Access under Linux?
> >
> > PostgreSQL side of things ... depending on what your queries look like,
do
> > you have appropriate INDEXes setup? Performed a VACUUM ANALYZE?
>
> --
> Gavin M. Roy, Director of Research & Development, C.T.O.
> Ready Set Net (formerly PathFinders)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which
> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.
Any
> review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any
action
> in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the
> intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
> contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
>