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
