Re: PostgreSQL vs. InnoDB performance

From: Leonardo Francalanci <lfrancalanci(at)simtel(dot)it>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. InnoDB performance
Date: 2005-06-03 10:46:11
Message-ID: 42A034F3.3090305@simtel.it
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Have a look at Mysql gotchas...

http://sql-info.de/mysql/database-definition.html#2_4

>
> So here's another little gem about our friends from Uppsala: If you create a
> table with InnoDB storage and your server does not have InnoDB configured, it
> falls back to MyISAM without telling you.
>
> As it turns out, the test done with PostgreSQL vs. real InnoDB results in just
> about identical timings (90 min). The test done using PostgreSQL with fsync
> off vs. MyISAM also results in about identical timings (3 min). So that
> looks much better, although the update performance of PostgreSQL is still a
> lot worse.
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Russell Smith 2005-06-03 11:43:17 Re: Old problem needs solution
Previous Message Jochem van Dieten 2005-06-03 10:24:50 Re: PostgreSQL vs. InnoDB performance