My company is currently hitting a problem with mysql/innodb having really
slow insert performance (we're seeing ~1K rows/second). My boss wants to
go and spend a bunch of money on the Tokutek backend. I'd rather we save
the money and go to postgres instead. We're not heavily invested in mysql
at this point (fixing our queries to switch from mysql to postgres would
take about five minutes). But my boss wants to see some benchmarks.
I've googled around for a while, but all the benchmarks I've found commit
one or more "fatal flaws", which render the benchmark pointless at best:
1) Comparing Postgres to MyISAM. Transactions are not an option for us,
so it doesn't matter if MyISAM is a hundred times faster. I want to
compare Postgres to InnoDB (bonus points for Postgres vr.s Tokutek).
2) Using the default configurations. Be serious- is there any one who
cares the least about performance who uses the default configuration?
3) Using old versions of Postgres. I'd like the survey to at least use
the 8.x series, bonus points for it being 9.x.
4) Not using COPY for inserts. We would, of course, be using the copy
command for inserts.
Here's the thing. I have personally seen postgres 8.1 insert 30K
rows/second, in to a real table, on crappy hardware (single slow IDE
drive, old crappy hardware). I would be shocked if I can't improve on the
InnoDB numbers by at least an order of magnitude. I'm whipping together a
personal benchmark to show this. But I need a "professional looking"
benchmark, with pretty charts and graphs and etc., to back me up.
Help?
Brian
