Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL - Mailing list pgsql-performance
From | Kevin Schroeder |
---|---|
Subject | Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL |
Date | |
Msg-id | 016b01c34242$f16504b0$0200a8c0@WORKSTATION Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL (Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info>) |
List | pgsql-performance |
That would be something that I'd like to see. Being new to PostgreSQL some of the basics of tuning the database were a little hard to find. The reason people go with MySQL is because it's fast and easy to use. That's why I had been using it for years. Then when a problem came along and I couldn't use MySQL I checked out PostgreSQL and found that it would fill the gap, but I had been able to get by on doing very little in terms of administration for MySQL (which performed well for me) and I was expecting PostgreSQL to be similar. As with many people I have the hat of DB admin, server admin, programmer and designer and the less I have to do in any of those areas makes my life a lot easier. When I first started using PostgreSQL I installed it and entered my data without any thought of having to tune it because I never had to before. If there were some program that could be inserted to the end of the make process or something it might help dimwits like me :-) realize that there was more that needs to be done once the installation has been completed. Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> To: <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 10:28 AM Subject: Re: [PERFORM] PostgreSQL vs. MySQL > On Friday 04 July 2003 20:56, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 04:35:03PM +0200, Michael Mattox wrote: > > > I see this as a major problem. How many people run postgres, decide it's > > > too slow and give up without digging into the documentation or coming to > > > this group? This seems to be pretty common. Even worst, they tell 10 > > > others how slow Postgres is and then it gets a bad reputation. > > > > There have been various proposals to do things of this sort. But > > there are always problems with it. For instance, on many OSes, > > Postgres would not run _at all_ when you first compiled it if its > > defaults were set more agressively. Then how many people would > > complain, "It just doesn't work," and move on without asking about > > it? > > There was a proposal to ship various postgresql.conf.sample like one for large > servers, one for medium, one for update intensive purpose etc. > > I was thinking over it. Actaully we could tweak initdb script to be > interactiev and get inputs from users and tune it accordingly. Of course it > would be nowhere near the admin reading the docs. but at least it won't fall > flat on performance groundas the way falls now. > > Shridhar > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster >
pgsql-performance by date: