From: | fabrizio(dot)ermini(at)sysdat(dot)it |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL |
Date: | 2000-11-13 17:16:39 |
Message-ID: | 3A103007.2913.221DDB8@localhost |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
> Still...Regardless of what database they're running, either their
> abstraction layer is shit or their queries really need optimized. Is that
> perhaps why, even at 5 clients, the page views he shows never went
> significantly above 10/sec?
>
I think this could be because they used real killer pages in the test,
and maybe this also the reason PgSQL fared this good (I've always
been and I'm still a postgres fan, but looking at that results I've
been quite astonished!!). Have you looked the spec? If I remember
well, Tim was talking about executing cuncurrently a page that
joined a dozen tables and another that was doing
update/select/insert on the same tables. Under these condition, 10
pages/sec it seems lighting to me!!!!
bye!
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Fabrizio Ermini Alternate E-mail:
C.so Umberto, 7 faermini(at)tin(dot)it
loc. Meleto Valdarno Mail on GSM: (keep it short!)
52020 Cavriglia (AR) faermini(at)sms(dot)tin(dot)it
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?= | 2000-11-13 17:20:20 | Re: PL/Perl and gcc |
Previous Message | Titus Brown | 2000-11-13 17:01:39 | PHPBuilder article -- |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-11-13 17:22:09 | Re: Details for planned template0/template1 change |
Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2000-11-13 17:02:17 | Re: Details for planned template0/template1 change |