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 E5C1CB43168 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 14:50:17 +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 08981-07 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:50:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: from www.pspl.co.in (www.pspl.co.in [202.54.11.65]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF317B4316A for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:50:04 -0300 (ADT) Received: (from root@localhost) by www.pspl.co.in (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h64Eo9r14883 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 20:20:09 +0530 Received: from daithan (daithan.intranet.pspl.co.in [192.168.7.161]) by www.pspl.co.in (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h64Eo9Q14878 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 20:20:09 +0530 From: "Shridhar Daithankar" To: Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 20:19:16 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL Reply-To: shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in Message-ID: <3F05E144.10448.6784AB@localhost> In-reply-to: References: <20030704142800.GC4592@libertyrms.info> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.12a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body X-Archive-Number: 200307/68 X-Sequence-Number: 2361 On 4 Jul 2003 at 16:35, Michael Mattox wrote: > I see this as a major problem. How many people run postgres, decide it's > too slow and give up without digging into the documentation or coming to > this group? This seems to be pretty common. Even worst, they tell 10 > others how slow Postgres is and then it gets a bad reputation. > > In my opinion the defaults should be set up for a typical database server > machine. Well, there are few major reasons defaults are the way they are and the reason it hurts the way they are 1. Postgresql expects to start on every machine on which it can run. Now some of the arcane platforms need kernel recompilation to raise SHMMAX and defaults to 1MB. 2. Postgresql uses shared memory being process based architecture. Mysql uses process memory being threaded application. It does not need kernel settings to work and usually works best it can. 3. We expect users/admins to be reading docs. If one does not read docs, it does not matter what defaults are. Sooner or later, it is going to fall on it's face. 4. Unlike likes of Oracle, postgresql does not pre-claim resources and starts hogging the system, replacing OS whereever possible. No it does not work that way.. One thing always strikes me. Lot of people(Not you Michael!..:-)) would complain that postgresql is slow and needs tweaking are not bothered by the fact that oracle needs almost same kind of and same amount of tweaking to get somewhere. Perception matterrs a lot. I would have whined for java as well but this is not the forum for that..:-) On a positive note, me and Josh are finishing a bare bone performance article that would answer lot of your questions. I am counting on you to provide valuable feedback. I expect it out tomorrow or on sunday..Josh will confirm that.. Bye Shridhar -- Theorem: a cat has nine tails.Proof: No cat has eight tails. A cat has one tail more than no cat. Therefore, a cat has nine tails.