Re: PostgreSQL client api

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Antimon <antimon(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL client api
Date: 2006-03-29 20:27:23
Message-ID: 442AEDAB.7030509@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Antimon wrote:
> Just noticed,
> On windows, these results are produced.
> But on linux, postgresql performs great. So postgre has a bad windows
> integration than mysql. Well since it supports win32 for a long time,
> it makes sense.
> I did some "multi client" tests and postgre could not even catch mysql
> so i decided to go test it on my linux box. It seems that the
> performance issue is about windows version.

Part of the problem may be the connection penalty on Windows. Since
PostgreSQL is a processed based database (mySQL is threaded I believe)
it is expensive (resource wise) to fire a bunch of connections.

You may be able to get similar performance if you were to use pconnect
or connection pooling with PHP and PostgreSQL.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message SCassidy 2006-03-29 20:34:53 Re: PostgreSQL's XML support comparison against other
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2006-03-29 20:19:03 Re: ODed on overloads