Re: MySQL/InnoDB benchmarks
От | Hannu Krosing |
---|---|
Тема | Re: MySQL/InnoDB benchmarks |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1014267688.2118.40.camel@rh72.home.ee обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: MySQL/InnoDB benchmarks (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 11:00, Tom Lane wrote: > "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes: > > Now, the InnoDB guys have done some benchmarks: > > If I did some benchmarks comparing Postgres and MySQL, and they came out > in favor of PG, I'm sure the MySQL guys would cry foul --- and with good > reason, seeing that I have no clue how to configure MySQL optimally. > But we are supposed to consider their tests to be unbiased? Get real. Still they show the theoretical possibility of speeding up these two features: INSERT INTO ... SELECT FROM - seems we have still room for improving btree inserts - I did the same tests with my desktop pc (RH7.1, PG 7.2, default conf) and got 4.83sec with primary key on T2 and 1.17 without. INSERT + CREATE UNIQUE INDEX took 4.56 sec. SELECT SUM(T1.B) FROM T1, T2 WHERE T1.A = T2.B - Most likely InnoDB can do this from index only for T2. I guess it would be possible for PG to at least cache tmin and tmax for index tuples in memory, if not on disk. > What really needs to be done here is a set of tests designed and > conducted by an *impartial* third party, with advice from experts in > each camp on how to properly configure their own DB. I haven't seen > any prospects for such a thing to happen, though. In the meantime, > I put no credence in MySQL-sponsored benchmarks, and I see no reason > for us to spend time generating our own equally-not-unbiased responses. It could be educating to run something simple like pgbench on both. -------------- Hannu
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: