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

Re: MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?

From: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>,<pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?
Date: 2004-02-03 17:16:46
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.33.0402031014290.23676-100000@css120.ihs.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-performance
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> Christopher Browne wrote:
> 
> >In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com (Jan Wieck) transmitted:
> >  
> >
> >>Josh Berkus wrote:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>I've had requests from a couple of businesses to see results of
> >>>infomal MySQL
> >>>+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL tests.    I know that we don't have the setup
> >>>to do full formal benchmarking, but surely someone in our community
> >>>has gone head-to-head on your own application?
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>how does someone compare an Apache+PHP+MySQL "thing" against something
> >>implemented with half the stuff done in stored procedures and the
> >>entire business model guarded by referential integrity, custom
> >>triggers and whatnot?
> >>
> >>Seriously, I am tired of this kind of question. You gotta get bold
> >>enough to stand up in a "meeting" like that, say "guy's, you can ask
> >>me how this compares to Oracle ... but if you're seriously asking me
> >>how this compares to MySQL, call me again when you've done your
> >>homework".
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Actually, before saying anything in public about their products, check
> >out what they require for use of their protected trademarks.
> ><http://www.mysql.com/company/trademark.html>
> >
> >To wit, they indicate that:
> >
> >  "The MySQL AB Marks may not be used in a manner or with respect to
> >  products that will decrease the value of the MySQL AB Marks or
> >  otherwise impair or damage MySQL AB's brand integrity, reputation or
> >  goodwill"
> >
> >It seems to me that presenting a benchmark that did not favor their
> >product could be quite reasonably considered to be an "impairment" of
> >their integrity, reputation, or goodwill, and therefore be something
> >worthy of legal attack.
> >  
> >
> It depends on how it is presented. Basically you just don't offer an 
> opinion on the matter.
> For example...
> 
> MySQL was 10x slower than PostgreSQL in this test....
> 
> Instead you could use something like.
> 
> We performed the following test.
> 
> MySQL scored this much
> PostgreSQL scored this much

My guess is that what they are saying is that you can't make a program 
like:

mysqlhelper

without their permission.

Using their mark in a review is fair use, and the only way they could get 
you is if you either failed to attribute it, or had signed a license with 
them saying you wouldn't do benchmarks, like how Oracle licenses their 
software.



In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: scott.marloweDate: 2004-02-03 17:30:38
Subject: Re: Database conversion woes...
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-02-03 17:03:11
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: eleinDate: 2004-02-03 21:08:42
Subject: Re: Only SEVEN DAYS Until OSCON Deadline!
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-02-03 17:03:11
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?

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