Re: Berkeley DB...

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>
Cc: Matthias Urlichs <smurf(at)noris(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Berkeley DB...
Date: 2000-05-26 11:09:00
Message-ID: 392E5B4C.3832997D@tm.ee
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Mike Mascari wrote:
>
>
> Although I am a PostgreSQL zealot, I have to admit that many
> PostgreSQL users have hidden behind the use of transactions in
> justifying the sometimes 2 - 3 times slower execution speeds in
> DML statements vs. MySQL. As Vadim points out in his comparison
> of COPY vs. INSERT, something is *wrong* with the time it takes
> for PostgreSQL to parse, plan, rewrite, and optimize. Now that
> MySQL has transactions through Berkley DB, I think its going to
> be harder to justify the pre-executor execution times.

We can always justify it by referring to extensibility of postgres,
which is surely part of the story

Sure we will be able to do cacheing to improve speed of
serial inserts.

> Just my two cents,
>
> Mike Mascari

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert B. Easter 2000-05-26 12:20:03 UNDER and INHERITS
Previous Message Gunnar R|nning 2000-05-26 09:36:38 Re: Postgresql 7.0 JDBC exceptions - broken connecti ons ?