X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (developer.postgresql.org [64.117.224.193]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 872B6B43164 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 14:33:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([64.117.224.193]) by localhost (svr1.postgresql.org [64.117.224.193]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94485-09 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:33:47 -0300 (ADT) Received: from tomts22-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts22.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.184]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 857F6B43163 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:33:46 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [10.0.2.11] ([216.208.117.7]) by tomts22-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.32 201-253-122-126-132-20030307) with ESMTP id <20030704143350.JSPV24487.tomts22-srv.bellnexxia.net@[10.0.2.11]>; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:33:50 -0400 Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL From: Rod Taylor To: Brian Tarbox Cc: Shridhar Daithankar , Postgresql Performance In-Reply-To: <01bf01c34235$a4c8aa60$01000001@trouble> References: <01bf01c34235$a4c8aa60$01000001@trouble> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-KA8R7YuMEd13qi/0nsXf" Message-Id: <1057329259.40425.36.camel@jester> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.0 Date: 04 Jul 2003 10:34:20 -0400 X-Archive-Number: 200307/65 X-Sequence-Number: 2358 --=-KA8R7YuMEd13qi/0nsXf Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Please understand the limits of how much information a consultant can sub= mit > to an open list like this about a client's confidential information. I've > answered every question I _can_ answer and when I get hostility in respon= se > all I can do is sigh and move on. Is there any chance you could show us an EXPLAIN ANALYZE output of the poor performing query in question? > I'm sorry if Shridhar is upset that I can't validate his favorite db but = ad > hominin comments aren't helpful. It was me who gave the comment based upon previous threads which requested information that had gone unanswered (not even a response stating such information could not be provided). The database you describe is quite small, so I'm not surprised MySQL does well with it. That said, it isn't normal to experience poor performance with PostgreSQL unless you've stumbled upon a poor spot (IN based sub-queries used to be poor performing, aggregates can be slow, mismatched datatypes, etc.). Output of EXPLAIN ANALYZE of a contrived query representative of the type of work done (that demonstrates the problem) with renamed tables and columns would go a long way to helping us help you. --=-KA8R7YuMEd13qi/0nsXf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQA/BZBr6DETLow6vwwRAnOpAJ9xZ6rIl9tjq/veG23AN7oqatn0yACeLToJ OaYe7NtmzbK+iYWU6HoD5gc= =kttR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-KA8R7YuMEd13qi/0nsXf--