From: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [ADMIN] postgresql under Windows is slow |
Date: | 2002-01-30 18:42:14 |
Message-ID: | 200201301832.g0UIWeS05299@neuromancer.ctlno.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 30 January 2002 11:58 am, Tom Lane wrote:
> Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> writes:
> > anybody has an experience how is stable postgresql under Windows system ?
> > I tried postgresq 7.1 under Cygwin, Windows 98 and was dissapointed
> > by very bad performance. Are there something I could tune ?
> > I got 250 sel/sec on simple select from table with 500 rows !
> > Under Linux I have 2500 sel/sec.
>
> Never tried it myself, but I distinctly recall someone reporting that
> they got comparable performance on Cygwin as on Linux. You might try
> asking on pgsql-cygwin.
We have a few developers that run Apache, PHP, Postgresql on Win2k and we
have definitely seen postgres be a good bit slower on Windows. Have never
benchmarked it however.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE8WD6K8BXvT14W9HARAh+GAJwKqs2k8fwJYooenFCqHMMgXr0DjQCcCaQr
bQxY10HunpD2+IACH/L0yas=
=p8Mb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2002-01-30 20:16:21 | Re: [ADMIN] postgresql under Windows is slow |
Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-01-30 18:31:43 | Re: Listing Triggers |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-30 19:00:17 | Re: Syscaches should store negative entries, too |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2002-01-30 18:40:17 | Re: Syscaches should store negative entries, too |