Re: [pgsql-performance] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [pgsql-performance] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 23489.1034001037@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] Large databases, performance ("Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in>) |
Ответы |
Re: [pgsql-performance] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> writes: > MySQL 3.23.52 with innodb transaction support: > 4 concurrent queries :- 257.36 ms > 40 concurrent queries :- 35.12 ms > Postgresql 7.2.2 > 4 concurrent queries :- 257.43 ms > 40 concurrent queries :- 41.16 ms I find this pretty fishy. The extreme similarity of the 4-client numbers seems improbable, from what I know of the two databases. I suspect your numbers are mostly measuring some non-database-related overhead --- communications overhead, maybe? > Only worry is database size. Postgresql is 111GB v/s 87 GB for mysql. All > numbers include indexes. This is really going to be a problem when things are > deployed. Any idea how can it be taken down? 7.3 should be a little bit better because of Manfred's work on reducing tuple header size --- if you create your tables WITHOUT OIDS, you should save 8 bytes per row compared to earlier releases. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: