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 63196B43A75 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 12:36:07 +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 64750-01 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 09:35:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mwinf0604.wanadoo.fr (smtp3.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.25]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 827C8B439E3 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 09:35:56 -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 773CD28000D5; Fri, 4 Jul 2003 14:35:59 +0200 (CEST) Reply-To: From: "Michael Mattox" To: "Brian Tarbox" , "Rafal Kedziorski" , Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 14:36:00 +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: <01af01c34227$a6cff470$01000001@trouble> Importance: Normal X-Archive-Number: 200307/50 X-Sequence-Number: 2343 > I recently took a system from MySQL to Postgres. Same HW, SW, same data. > The major operations where moderately complex queries (joins on 8 tables). > > The results we got was that Postgres was fully 3 times slower than MySql. > We were on this list a fair bit looking for answers and tried all the > standard answers. It was still much much much slower. I'm curious what the usage was. How many concurrent processes were performing the complex queries? I've heard that Postgres does better when the number of concurrent users is high and MySQL does better when the number is low. I have no idea if that is true or not. Michael