Re: more anti-postgresql FUD

From: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: more anti-postgresql FUD
Date: 2006-10-14 07:31:36
Message-ID: egq3op$ov5$1@sea.gmane.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

alexei(dot)vladishev(at)gmail(dot)com wrote on 11.10.2006 16:54:
> Do a simple test to see my point:
>
> 1. create table test (id int4, aaa int4, primary key (id));
> 2. insert into test values (0,1);
> 3. Execute "update test set aaa=1 where id=0;" in an endless loop
>
> I just did the test on PostgreSQL 7.4.12 and MySQL 5.0.22 (MyISAM,
> sorry had no configured InnoDB). Ubuntu 6.0.6, AMD64, 2GB, default
> database settings.
>
> MySQL performs very well, approximately 15000-20000 updates per second
> with no degradation of performance.
>

Just a follow up: if you base your choice of DBMS on this test, you have to
chose HSQLDB. I just ran this test on my WinXP AMD64 box, and it performed
constantly at ~40000 updates per second.

Thomas

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shane Ambler 2006-10-14 07:32:41 Re: Resetting Serial Column Sequence Number
Previous Message Andreas Kretschmer 2006-10-14 06:52:55 Re: Resetting Serial Column Sequence Number

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Markus Schaber 2006-10-14 08:35:24 Re: Interface of the R-tree in order to work with postgresql
Previous Message Ashish Goel 2006-10-14 07:14:07 Re: postgres database crashed