Re: [cobalt-users] (Database News)

["Steven Werby" <steven-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gerald Waugh <gerald@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Is Postgres actually this much faster than the others, or did Great Bridge
play
> with the test?

Anytime a DB software company does a benchmark test they construct it in such a
way that it takes advantage of its strengths.  Look at MySQL's benchmark and it
appears it's much faster than PostgreSQL
(http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmark-results/result-mysql,pg.html).
Based on how most people use the two databases in web applications it's my
experience (and that of many others) that MySQL is significantly faster, though
PostgreSQL has some functionality MySQL does not yet have (and which can either
be programmed in the application and is rarely needed except on high-end
ecommerce sites and enterprise level applications).

> excerpts from   http://www.greatbridge.com/news/p_081420001.html
> In the tested configuration, Postgres peaked at 1127.8 transactions per second
> with five users, and still processed at a steady rate of 1070.4 with 100
users.

I never trust any benchmarks.  I go by real life performance.  So you know,
GreatBridge is a private company that was formed this year and opened up
headquarters in Norfolk, VA just a few weeks ago.  They do support and
programming for PostgreSQL.  That's all.  So the study *could* be a little
biased.  The study was performed by Xperts Inc. which is an IT firm here in
Richmond.  I have a contact or two there, but I doubt they can tell me anything
about the study.  It's also interesting to note that GreatBridge is funded by
Landmark Communications, owners of The Weather Channel, tons of newspapers,
ISPs, etc.  With the kind of clout, money, and influence Frank Batten and
Landmark have I would expect PostgreSQL to make a pretty big dent in the
corporate market.

--
Steven Werby {steven-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx}