From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Tomi N/A" <hefest(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | harding(dot)ian(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Speed of postgres compared to ms sql, is this |
Date: | 2006-12-05 19:34:31 |
Message-ID: | 10145.1165347271@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Tomi N/A" <hefest(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2006/12/4, Ian Harding <harding(dot)ian(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>> Amen. When I migrated from MSSQL to PostgreSQL (4 years ago), I found
>> out exactly how seriously MS SQL coddles you when it comes to its "Oh,
>> I know what you really meant" query planning. I committed some sins
>> MS SQL covered up nicely and PostgreSQL flat out crawled when
>> presented to it.
> I've seen the exact same behaviour last year with pg 8.1 vs. MS SQL 2k.
> It was an unexpected shock, but it's really not that hard to make
> pgsql run much faster.
> There are simply things which pgsql executes painfully slow if you
> don't write them the way the server expects you to.
These sorts of reports would be far more helpful if they contained some
specifics. What queries does MSSQL do better than Postgres, exactly?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-12-05 19:41:24 | PostgreSQL 8.2 Now Available |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-05 19:32:48 | Re: Unable to restart postgres - database system was interrupted |