Re: PostgreSQL a slow DB? - Mailing list pgsql-novice
From | |
---|---|
Subject | Re: PostgreSQL a slow DB? |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20060410234746.72719.qmail@web33315.mail.mud.yahoo.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: PostgreSQL a slow DB? ("Relaxin" <me@yourhouse.com>) |
Responses |
Re: PostgreSQL a slow DB?
|
List | pgsql-novice |
> That doesn't really help anwser the question... > The developers in our office (and myself) are also > under the impression that > PG is a very slow database. > Also when you look thru the "performance" newsgroup, > it seems to me that > what people are saying is true. > > So instead of being a jerk to those of us who are a > "novice" to PG, how > about giving some concrete answers to these > performance questions. > > > > ebcorder@rockwellcollins.com wrote: > >> > >> I know when comparison tests are performed they > can be tilted on these > >> internet sites. But I see so many people > declaring PostgreSQL to be the > >> slowest I am thinking where there is smoke > there's fire. > > "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> wrote in > message > news:200604090338.k393c8G09848@candle.pha.pa.us... > > > > Lots of people still think Elvis is alive. :-) > > > > -- > > Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us > > Relaxin... interesting name given your response. i have found pgsql to be extremely fast on our intranet production system (near instantaneous). however, it currently doesn't have a lot of data - so i'm not sure if it is a good gauge. as for chatter, it is just that - chatter. would you trust a debian fan to accurately describe gentoo? or visa versa? how about a microsoft sales rep and linux? it would be very naive to think an accurate and fair assessment would be given, no? my guess is that you are tuned into a bunch of mysql or mssql sites (oracle is alledgedly the slowest db of them all). as for enterprise db's marketing... we both know they take the absolute slowest postgresql can be (ie, set pgsql to be as slow as possible) and then they compare themselves to it in a test that absolutely gives them the best possible advantage. if they didn't, the marketing department would be fired. that's marketing. tune up pgsql and don't let enterprise db manipulate the test to their absolute best favor and i doubt the difference is noticable. it surely is not 50% faster. if you want a site that runs on postgresql, try sesamestreet.org. they use postgresql. http://www.sesameworkshop.org/ no, not market hyped enterprise db and their fattest marketing hype number they could spin. postgresql is the db. ps - it is silly to call a properly configured postgresql db a slow db (slow defined in a rational way) under acceptable loads for this db. typically, only zealots with agendas do that kind of stuff. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
pgsql-novice by date: