Thread: Benchmarking PostgreSQL against others on Windows?
I am working on the Windows platform and I have mainly used MSSQLServer 2000 for database stuff. Now I am looking at alternatives and one is PostgreSQL, another MySql. Can anyone point me towards a report from a decent benchmarking test showing the pros and cons of these servers? I assume someone has done it already.... I am mostly interested in servers running on Windows since that is our main target platform. Bo Berglund
On 11/27/06, Bo Berglund <bo.berglund@telia.com> wrote: > I am working on the Windows platform and I have mainly used > MSSQLServer 2000 for database stuff. > > Now I am looking at alternatives and one is PostgreSQL, another MySql. > Can anyone point me towards a report from a decent benchmarking test > showing the pros and cons of these servers? Decent is quite "flexible" a term, I'm afraid ... http://search.postgresql.org/archives.search?cs=utf-8&fm=on&st=20&dt=back&q=mssql+benchmark There are other discussions on the lists about the quality of benchmarks, mostly on the comparison between MySQL and Postgres, though. > Bo Berglund Cheers, Andrej
> I am working on the Windows platform and I have > mainly used > MSSQLServer 2000 for database stuff. > > Now I am looking at alternatives and one is > PostgreSQL, another MySql. > Can anyone point me towards a report from a decent > benchmarking test > showing the pros and cons of these servers? > I assume someone has done it already.... > I am mostly interested in servers running on Windows > since that is our > main target platform. > > Bo Berglund Bo, make sure the benchmarks are equal. There is a file system or something in mysql that is optional, but required to do transactions (perhaps other functionality, too). make sure pgsql is compared to that version of mysql. you then have to decide if the time difference is meaningful (can you tell whether an app is pgsql or mysql by just using the app?). if it is meaningful, is it more meaningful than what pgsql offers - a great license and some pretty professional features. the only downside that i've had working with postgresql is that most tutorials are geared towards mysql so i have to translate some tutorials and books into pgsql. otherwise, i'm thrilled with postgresql. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com
operationsengineer1@yahoo.com wrote: >> I am working on the Windows platform and I have >> mainly used >> MSSQLServer 2000 for database stuff. >> >> Now I am looking at alternatives and one is >> PostgreSQL, another MySql. >> Can anyone point me towards a report from a decent >> benchmarking test >> showing the pros and cons of these servers? >> I assume someone has done it already.... >> I am mostly interested in servers running on Windows >> since that is our >> main target platform. >> >> Bo Berglund > > Bo, make sure the benchmarks are equal. There is a > file system or something in mysql that is optional, > but required to do transactions (perhaps other > functionality, too). > > make sure pgsql is compared to that version of mysql. > Somewhere I found a link for doing a number of database comparisons. Basically it comes down to this: simple SELECT statements: mysql almost always wins. Everything else is mixed. There are a few cases where postgresql does really poorly but the operations are rare daily activity. INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE postgresql "generally" does better. The problem with the tests is that these are typically done with single users at a time and they don't exercise any of the other benefits that postgresql offers. But I would suggest you set up two versions of some aspect of your working environment: one in postgres and on in MySQL and run them for a few weeks using mock client scripts to perform different actions. The real money comes when you have to maintain the database and manage concurrent users. Do things that are "bad" for databases and see who comes out on top. Like lots of concurrent operations against the same tables, rows, and fields to see how everyone fails and recovers from such operations. How do you optimize the tables? table backup/restore? reindex? Odds are, these two tables will be closer than you think. But it's the maintenance that will kill you in the end. After all, you're the lackey who is going to have to keep it running.
On Nov 26, 2006, at 9:35 PM, <operationsengineer1@yahoo.com> <operationsengineer1@yahoo.com> wrote: > the only downside that i've had working with > postgresql is that most tutorials are geared towards > mysql so i have to translate some tutorials and books > into pgsql. Have you considered publishing any of what you've translated? Yes, PostgreSQL could use more training material... -- Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
On Nov 27, 2006, at 5:24 AM, Tom Allison wrote: > Basically it comes down to this: > simple SELECT statements: mysql almost always wins. > Everything else is mixed. > There are a few cases where postgresql does really poorly but the > operations are rare daily activity. > INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE postgresql "generally" does better. > > The problem with the tests is that these are typically done with > single users at a time and they don't exercise any of the other > benefits that postgresql offers. But I would suggest you set up > two versions of some aspect of your working environment: one in > postgres and on in MySQL and run them for a few weeks using mock > client scripts to perform different actions. Actually, the folks over at http://tweakers.net recently benchmarked MySQL and PostgreSQL with their website code. IIRC, this is mostly "simple selects", yet PostgreSQL clearly outperformed MySQL once you had a few concurrent connections happening. My experience is that the only places you'll readily see MySQL outperform PostgreSQL is when you're only using a single connection, and probably not with complex queries. Of course, the first rule of benchmarking is to use your own application. -- Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
----- Original Message ---- From: Jim Nasby <decibel@decibel.org> To: operationsengineer1@yahoo.com Cc: bo.berglund@telia.com; pgsql-novice@postgresql.org Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 5:12:27 PM Subject: Re: [NOVICE] Benchmarking PostgreSQL against others on Windows? On Nov 26, 2006, at 9:35 PM, <operationsengineer1@yahoo.com> <operationsengineer1@yahoo.com> wrote: > the only downside that i've had working with > postgresql is that most tutorials are geared towards > mysql so i have to translate some tutorials and books > into pgsql. Have you considered publishing any of what you've translated? Yes, PostgreSQL could use more training material... -- Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell) JIm, I have published my PHP5, Apache 2 and PostgresSQL Windows installation notes (by they way - much of what I learnedcame from the kind folks here and on other mailing lists and forums). They can be found here: http://www.geocities.com/operationsengineer1/ and I think they are 98% good since nobody I've referred has come back complaining. ;-) I translated a PHP user authentication system (sha1 , or some such, with a splash of salt) I found on Sitepoint and I'm usingit in an app. I never gave much thought to publishing it, but I will add that to my "to do" list, which includes cleaningup the code a bit first. ;-) If there is any interest, I'll post the gory details as they now stand (the code isn't too bad, but I'm sure the code organizationcan be improved). My current project is to create Agile Web Development with Rails PostgreSQL specific notes and cheat sheet references andpost them if it is OK with the original authors. I agree that documentation should be improved. I would've saved 30 days installing PGSQL about 2 years ago if the standardPGSQL install tutorial went the next step and showed how to connect v8.0 via PGAdmin3. It didn't, so I spent 30days installing it via Cygwin because tutorials existed to do that (albeit, not all the information was in a single placethat I could find, hence, the 30 day struggle). ____________________________________________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com
See Below... ----- Original Message ---- From: Bo Berglund <bo.berglund@telia.com> To: pgsql-novice@postgresql.org Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 1:13:30 PM Subject: [NOVICE] Benchmarking PostgreSQL against others on Windows? I am working on the Windows platform and I have mainly used MSSQLServer 2000 for database stuff. Now I am looking at alternatives and one is PostgreSQL, another MySql. Can anyone point me towards a report from a decent benchmarking test showing the pros and cons of these servers? I assume someone has done it already.... I am mostly interested in servers running on Windows since that is our main target platform. Bo Berglund ---------------------------------------- I'm not sure if this translates into Windows, but here is a published comparison of pgsql vs mysql. http://www.postgresql.org/about/news.691 (from the postgresql.org front page) i think postgresql did quite well - which is obvious by the charts link.. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited