Re: mysql to postgresql, performance questions - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Arjen van der Meijden
Subject Re: mysql to postgresql, performance questions
Date
Msg-id 4BA25E12.20906@tweakers.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: mysql to postgresql, performance questions  (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
On 18-3-2010 16:50 Scott Marlowe wrote:
> It's different because it only takes pgsql 5 milliseconds to run the
> query, and 40 seconds to transfer the data across to your applicaiton,
> which THEN promptly throws it away.  If you run it as
>
> MySQL's client lib doesn't transfer over the whole thing.  This is
> more about how each db interface is implemented in those languages.

Its the default behavior of both PostgreSQL and MySQL to transfer the
whole resultset over to the client. Or is that different for Ruby's
MySQL-driver? At least in PHP the behavior is similar for both.
And I certainly do hope its 40ms rather than 40s, otherwise it would be
a really bad performing network in either case (15s for mysql) or very
large records (which I doubt).

I'm wondering if a new connection is made between each query. PostgreSQL
is (afaik still is but I haven't compared that recently) a bit slower on
that department than MySQL.

Best regards,

Arjen

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: mysql to postgresql, performance questions
Next
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: Building multiple indexes concurrently