Re: DBMS Engines and Performance
От | Mikael Carneholm |
---|---|
Тема | Re: DBMS Engines and Performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7F10D26ECFA1FB458B89C5B4B0D72C2B8D773C@sesrv12.wirelesscar.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | DBMS Engines and Performance (Rich Shepard <rshepard@appl-ecosys.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: DBMS Engines and Performance
Re: DBMS Engines and Performance |
Список | pgsql-general |
> However, what puzzles me is this statement: "PostgreSQL has continued > to > fall behind other database engines in both performance and features, so I > don't see compelling reason to work on it in my very limited free time." http://pda.tweakers.net/?reviews/649 http://pda.tweakers.net/?reviews/661 http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?25,93181,93181 http://london.pm.org/pipermail/london.pm/Week-of-Mon-20051219/000637.htm l http://mailman.fastxs.net/pipermail/dbmail/2006-December/010754.html I'm tired of teenage 1337 skill0rz PHP hackers who go "whoaah, 0ms!" after running "select count(*) from forum_posts" in a single thread (the developer himself testing his app), and then claim "MySQL rocks! I tested the postgres 7.1 that came with <insert linux distro of choice here>, but it was twice as slow!!!! Postgres sucks!" Ask them what they know about concurrency: transaction isolation level, MVCC vs. locking, and how they do when they test OLTP performance in highly concurrent scenarios, and I'm sure you'll get a "huh?" as an answer. Kids... ____________________________________________ Mikael Carneholm Systems Engineer WirelessCar AB
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: