On Sat, 22 Jun 2002, Peter Dimov wrote:
> I do not have any answer on my
> questin: Is postgres good as performace compared to oracle...
The answer to that is, "it depends." Some applications will work
just as well, others will not.
> ...and if yes how to fine tune it.
A few points on tuning:
1. Try to use tests that reflect as accurately as possible what
your application will do, and try to tune your application as well.
For example, if your application really does do 25,000 inserts in
a single transaction, perhaps it would be better off using the COPY
command instead.
2. When you're new to postgres, or any database system, it will
take time and experimentation before you figure out the system's
idiosyncrasies and learn how to tune it. If you really need to be
up and running right away, you should probably just go out and buy
the system you're most familiar with.
3. Becuase you're saving so much money in software costs, you may
have a bit of extra money to throw at hardware. So you should
consider perhaps adding a few more disks to your system, and moving
at least the log files on to a separate disk.
> And the second question: Was enyone from the list a good perofmed
> postgres and if yes can I receiv this test result.
Yes, I've gotten excellent performance out of postgres from time
to time. However, the test results would be meaningless for you;
they probably don't relate to your application at all.
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
