Re: Humor me: Postgresql vs. MySql (esp. licensing)

"Randolf Richardson, DevNet SysOp 29" <rr(at)8x(dot)ca> writes:
>> - Speed: mHz for mHz, MySQL has PostgreSQL beat for simple
>> searches. Once you start getting complex, PostgreSQL is
>> competitive. I think this speed issue is overrated: over time,
>> PostgreSQL has sped up and MySQL has slowed down which is pretty
>> impressive, considering both have added features from their early
>> versions.
>
> Do you know of any published benchmarks for this? I need to
> convince some people who are hell-bent on MySQL being fast for
> everything that they're mis-informed, and they refuse to take
> anyone's word for it.

Publishing benchmarks is more than a little troublesome.

The sorts of ways to make PostgreSQL _really shine_, performance-wise,
involves making use of features that MySQL simply doesn't have. Fancy
footwork with stored procedures, for instance.

And "they" would (somewhat rightly) object that this would represent a
test that is "intended to make MySQL fail."

And if you start publishing results, MySQL AB might be able to send
"attack lawyers" at you, irrespective of whether there's a case with
merit. Virtually all of the commercial databases have a licensing
clause that forbids publishing benchmarks without the express consent
of the vendor, and a decent case can be made that this is a legitimate
'right' for the vendor to have.

In any case, I would think it doubtful that there is anything
reasonable to present to people that are so religiously "hell-bent,"
in any case. If they don't want to believe you, they will find
excuses to disbelieve whatever results you may give them.
--
output = reverse("ofni.smrytrebil" "@" "enworbbc")
<http://dev6.int.libertyrms.com/>
Christopher Browne
(416) 646 3304 x124 (land)