| From: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Oleg Lebedev <oleg(dot)lebedev(at)waterford(dot)org>, Jeff <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Tuning/performance issue... |
| Date: | 2003-10-04 02:22:00 |
| Message-ID: | 1065234119.23288.13.camel@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 21:39, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have updated the FAQ to be:
>
> In comparison to MySQL or leaner database systems, we are
> faster for multiple users, complex queries, and a read/write query
> load. MySQL is faster for SELECT queries done by a few users.
>
> Is this accurate? It seems so.
May wish to say ... for simple SELECT queries ...
Several left outer joins, subselects and a large number of joins are
regularly performed faster in PostgreSQL due to a more mature optimizer.
But MySQL can pump out SELECT * FROM table WHERE key = value; queries in
a hurry.
I've often wondered if they win on those because they have a lighter
weight parser / optimizer with less "lets try simplifying this query"
steps or if the MYISAM storage mechanism is simply quicker at pulling
data off the disk.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Browne | 2003-10-04 02:37:53 | Re: Tuning/performance issue... |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-10-04 01:39:40 | Re: Tuning/performance issue... |