In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Rick Schumeyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> These results are for a single process populating a table with 934k rows,
> and then performing some selects. I also compared the effect of creating
> indexes on some of the columns.
> I have not yet done any testing
Mark Rae wrote:
I would say that doing the concurrency tests is probably the most
important factor in comparing other databases against MySQL, as
MySQL will almost always win in single-user tests.
E.g. here are some performance figures from tests I have done in the past.
This is with a 6GB databse
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Also, a 32-bit machine can only hold so much RAM. If I'm correct, there
>> are ways to address more memory than that on a 32 bit machine, but I
>> wonder at what cost? In other words, is it a good idea to address more
>> than 4GB on a 32 bit machine
Mark Rae wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:51:03PM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
Be careful assuming that. DB benchmarks are hard to do in a general
sense. His results probably indicate a general trend, but you should
test your application yourself to get a real result. His pattern of SQL
queries might
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 07:00:25PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Oh, you have to try CVS HEAD or a nightly snapshot. Tom made a major
> change that allows scaling in SMP environments.
Ok, I'll give it a try in the next couple of days when there is
some free time available on the machine.
-Ma
Mark Rae wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 06:46:50PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Mark Rae wrote:
> > > Also, while on the subject of scaling. I had the opportunity
> > > to try postgres on a 16CPU Altix and couldn't get it to scale
> > > more than about 4x, whereas Oracle got up to about 12x fa
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 06:46:50PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Mark Rae wrote:
> > Also, while on the subject of scaling. I had the opportunity
> > to try postgres on a 16CPU Altix and couldn't get it to scale
> > more than about 4x, whereas Oracle got up to about 12x faster
> >
> We have had so
Mark Rae wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:51:03PM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > Be careful assuming that. DB benchmarks are hard to do in a general
> > sense. His results probably indicate a general trend, but you should
> > test your application yourself to get a real result. His pattern of SQL
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:51:03PM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Be careful assuming that. DB benchmarks are hard to do in a general
> sense. His results probably indicate a general trend, but you should
> test your application yourself to get a real result. His pattern of SQL
> queries might be very
> Also, a 32-bit machine can only hold so much RAM. If I'm correct, there
> are ways to address more memory than that on a 32 bit machine, but I
> wonder at what cost? In other words, is it a good idea to address more
> than 4GB on a 32 bit machine? If not, is it a reasonable choice to
> invest in
On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 12:43 +, Richard Huxton wrote:
> Take 30 minutes to read through the article below. It covers the basics
> of how to manage your configuration settings.
>http://www.powerpostgresql.com/PerfList
>
That's an informative article. I was hoping, however, that it would h
On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 14:07 +0100, tony wrote:
> > by the time 3 clients are running, postgres is getting through the
> > queries 1.90/1.34=1.42 times faster
>
> That is very interesting!!!
>
> I have several webapps on my server each one opens several queries to
> the database from _each_ JSP -
Le mardi 15 mars 2005 à 12:26 +, Mark Rae a écrit :
> >> Clients 1 2 3 4 6 812163264
> >> 128
> >> --
> >> mysql-4.1.1 1.00 1.41 1.34 1.16 0.93 1.03 1.01 1.00 0
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 06:04:01PM -0500, Chris Browne wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Rae) writes:
>> Clients 1 2 3 4 6 812163264
>> 128
>> --
>> mysql-4.1.1 1.00 1.41 1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Rae) writes:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 06:52:58AM -0500, Rick Schumeyer wrote:
>> Below are some PRELIMINARY results in comparing the performance of pgsql and
>> mysql.
>> ...
>> I have not yet done any testing of transactions, multiple concurrent
>> processes, etc.
>>
>
>
Richard Huxton writes:
> Rick Schumeyer wrote:
>> Below are some PRELIMINARY results in comparing the performance of pgsql and
>> mysql.
> Take 30 minutes to read through the article below. It covers the basics
> of how to manage your configuration settings.
>http://www.powerpostgresql.com/P
On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 05:52, Rick Schumeyer wrote:
> Below are some PRELIMINARY results in comparing the performance of pgsql and
> mysql.
>
> These results are for a single process populating a table with 934k rows,
> and then performing some selects. I also compared the effect of creating
> in
Rick Schumeyer wrote:
That site produces some sort of php error.
Hmm - was working this morning. Perhaps some maintenance going on.
I don't suppose this information is available elsewhere?
Try some slightly older notes here:
http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/Tidbits/index.php
--
Richard
That site produces some sort of php error.
I don't suppose this information is available elsewhere?
> Stop now. I've not looked at your test results, and frankly there is no
> point. As it ships, PG should run fine on a small corner of an old
> laptop. It will not perform well with any sort of se
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 06:52:58AM -0500, Rick Schumeyer wrote:
> Below are some PRELIMINARY results in comparing the performance of pgsql and
> mysql.
> ...
> I have not yet done any testing of transactions, multiple concurrent
> processes, etc.
>
I would say that doing the concurrency tests is
Rick Schumeyer wrote:
Below are some PRELIMINARY results in comparing the performance of pgsql and
mysql.
These results are for a single process populating a table with 934k rows,
and then performing some selects. I also compared the effect of creating
indexes on some of the columns.
I have not
Hi Rick,
the work you are doing is important (at least I think so).
From my experience PosgreSQL performance is also very slow in case
there are several LEFT JOINs and there are varchar() fields. You can see
an example in archive where my problem is described (Subject: "How to
read query plan").
Below are some PRELIMINARY results in comparing the performance of pgsql and
mysql.
These results are for a single process populating a table with 934k rows,
and then performing some selects. I also compared the effect of creating
indexes on some of the columns.
I have not yet done any testing
23 matches
Mail list logo
