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 18E2AB438B5 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 12:46:22 +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 64750-07 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 09:46:11 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mwinf0604.wanadoo.fr (smtp3.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.25]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 853B8B438A3 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 09:46:11 -0300 (ADT) Received: from Paris (ABoulogne-110-1-4-48.w81-49.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.49.7.48]) by mwinf0604.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 8CC3128000FE; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 14:46:14 +0200 (CEST) Reply-To: From: "Michael Mattox" To: "Brian Tarbox" , "Rafal Kedziorski" , Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 14:46:15 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 In-Reply-To: <01b401c34229$dbab6100$01000001@trouble> Importance: Normal X-Archive-Number: 200307/52 X-Sequence-Number: 2345 > I'm actually leaving this list but I can answer this question. > Our results > were with a single user and we were running Inodb. We were running on > RedHat 8.0 / 9.0 with vanilla linux settings. That's funny, you make a statement that Postgres was 3 times slower than MySQL and then you promptly leave the list! Just kidding. It'd be interesting to see what happens if you test your system with a hundred users. If it's a webapp you can use JMeter to do this really easily. Michael