Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Postgres v MySQL 5.0

From: Chander Ganesan <chander(at)otg-nc(dot)com>
To: Brad Nicholson <bnichols(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>
Cc: Lukas Kahwe Smith <smith(at)pooteeweet(dot)org>, "Leif B(dot) Kristensen" <leif(at)solumslekt(dot)org>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres v MySQL 5.0
Date: 2006-11-10 19:53:33
Message-ID: 4554D8BD.4050606@otg-nc.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
Brad Nicholson wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 11:42 +0100, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>   
>> Leif B. Kristensen wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> It's hardly more difficult to start using PostgreSQL than MySQL. The 
>>> installation part is mostly the same. Regarding the query language 
>>> itself, the differences are small enough that it doesn't matter much 
>>> from a learning point of view.
>>>       
>> The difference is that PostgreSQL does not bundle as much functionality 
>> as MySQL does. Also the simple fact that you have plenty of choices in 
>> PostgreSQL makes it harder as you grow. This is why developers recommend 
>> other developers to use MySQL. Its not only easy to setup, but it will 
>> do what most of them expect even if they grow bigger. Like replication 
>> is in there by default etc.
>>     
>
> Actually, I think the biggest barrier to winning over this crowd is
> performance out of the box.  MySQL just sort of "works" with the default
> settings, and is quite fast.  The default Postgres install, well, if you
> don't tune the parameters, analyze your data, ect, the performance will
> be poor compared to MySQL.
>
> I was chatting with a developer the other day who uses MySQL, and he
> explained how he chose MySQL over Postgres.  He loaded a fairly large
> data set into both, did some querying on it, and MySQL was way faster.
> I'm sure he didn't tune the conf file, or analyze the data, or some
> combination of the things you need to do.
>
>   
That's hard to compete with.  By default tables created in MySQL are 
non-transactional...and can thus operate with much less overhead .  In a 
"query only" - or when you are only inserting rows in a table - 
situation, this is quite fast.  As a transactional database, I'm not 
sure how well PostgreSQL could compete with that...

-- 
Chander Ganesan
The Open Technology Group
One Copley Parkway, Suite 210
Morrisville, NC  27560
Phone: 877-258-8987/919-463-0999
http://www.otg-nc.com


In response to

Responses

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2006-11-10 19:58:20
Subject: Re: Postgres v MySQL 5.0
Previous:From: Brad NicholsonDate: 2006-11-10 19:39:51
Subject: Re: Postgres v MySQL 5.0

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group