X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15D7D11F6609
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:22:18 -0300 (ADT)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.119
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.119 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.118,
	UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id R5X2Ct8hsWn2
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:22:15 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from exchange.g2switchworks.com (mail.g2switchworks.com
	[63.87.162.25])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD8C611F6296
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:22:14 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from 10.10.1.37 ([10.10.1.37]) by exchange.g2switchworks.com
	([10.10.1.2]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ;
	Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:22:11 +0000
Received: from state.g2switchworks.com by mail.g2switchworks.com;
	19 Apr 2006 10:22:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Inserts optimization?
From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
To: Markus Schaber <schabi@logix-tt.com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <mha@sollentuna.net>,
	Pgsql performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <44462849.3070209@logix-tt.com>
References: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA352AE@algol.sollentuna.se>
	<44462849.3070209@logix-tt.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1145460130.23538.119.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) 
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:22:10 -0500
X-Archive-Number: 200604/429
X-Sequence-Number: 18513

On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 07:08, Markus Schaber wrote:
> Hi, Magnus,
> 
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> 
> > Bacula already serializes access to the database (they have to support
> > mysql/myisam), so this shouldn't help.
> 
> Ouch, that hurts.
> 
> To support mysql, they break performance for _every other_ database system?

Note that should be "to support MySQL with MyISAM tables".

If they had written it for MySQL with innodb tables they would likely be
able to use the same basic methods for performance tuning MySQL as or
Oracle or PostgreSQL.

It's the refusal of people to stop using MyISAM table types that's the
real issue.

Of course, given the shakey ground MySQL is now on with Oracle owning
innodb...