[ic] Performance of mysql versus postgressql

[Jason Kohles]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 02:31:58PM -0500, Jay Flaherty wrote:
> I beg to differ. mySQL is quite likely to be faster under all
> conditions. We run mySQL on a dozen databases anywhere from 1,000
> records up to 2.5M records and anywhere from 10 to 100's of transactions
> per second. All on the same machine and daemon. Most of these run from
> various web servers with no effect on page loads. Postgres' strength
> lies in being a "Object-Relational DBMS, supporting almost all SQL
> constructs, including subselects, transactions, and user-defined types
> and functions.". Because of this it is not as lean and mean as mySQL is.
> Check out:
> http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmark-results/result-mysql,pg.html 
> 
I'd have to agree with that, I've done MySQL databases in excess of 200
million rows, and it outperformed everything else I tried it on.  If
you need things like subselects and transactions, postgres is the way to
go, but I'd pick MySQL for sheer performance every time.

-- 
Jason Kohles                                 jkohles@redhat.com
Senior System Architect                      (703)786-8036 (cellular)
Red Hat Professional Consulting              (703)456-2940 (office)