Subject: Re: Air-traffic benchmark
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Lefteris <lsidir@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <852badbc1001070438j36eb10d3qa22398ffcbef405f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <852badbc1001070438j36eb10d3qa22398ffcbef405f@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 10:41:13 +0000
Message-Id: <1265280073.4660.157.camel@ebony>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 13:38 +0100, Lefteris wrote:
> Reported query times are (in sec):
> MonetDB 7.9s
> InfoBright 12.13s
> LucidDB 54.8s

It needs to be pointed out that those databases are specifically
optimised for Data Warehousing, whereas Postgres core is optimised for
concurrent write workloads in production systems.

If you want a best-vs-best type of comparison, you should be looking at
a version of Postgres optimised for Data Warehousing. These results show
that Postgres-related options exist that clearly beat the above numbers.
http://community.greenplum.com/showthread.php?t=111
I note also that Greenplum's Single Node Edition is now free to use, so
is a reasonable product for comparison on this list.

Also, I'm unimpressed by a Data Warehouse database that requires
everything to reside in memory, e.g. MonetDB. That severely limits
real-world usability, in my experience because it implies the queries
you're running aren't ad-hoc.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com