Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:17 PM, justin <justin@emproshunts.com> wrote:
Where are you getting the $4 and $6 per transaction for PostgreSql. i just
search through this list
You won't see it there because none of the PG vendors see a reason to
spend the time and money officially benchmarking Postgres only for it
to place last. Similar to Josh Berkus, I know where it ranks because
I (and several other EnterpriseDB developers) ran the tests to try and
get Postgres a TPC-C.
I would like to see them even if PostgreSql comes dead last.
Oracle only just in the last year dropped to below $1.00 it mixed bag from
$3 to $52 (back on 2001)
Oracle hadn't run price/performance in awhile prior to that due to the
cost of the software. Still, Microsoft has had it below $1 since
2005.
Does that not prove the point Oracle is over price software compared to the competition.
First Step in testing and comparing is agree on a Standard that everyone can
agree to. Second step test the system without cheating which numerous
software including Oracle, MS, and IBM have.
Cheating? It's an industry standard benchmark. And, for the record,
when I compared PG to Oracle on TPC-H, I didn't use Oracle's
additional features, I did a one-to-one comparison using the exact
same schema and indexes.
-Jonah
You can cheat at industry standards, I see it every day in the electrical field where i spend most of time.
The only way to verify the results is duplicate the test and given these servers cost from $100K to $10million its unlikely these test are verified by a 3rd party running independent hardware. From where i come from for result to be proven someone else must duplicate the results independently with only instructions given by the original tester.
