From: Steinar H. Gunderson <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Open request for benchmarking input
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 12:51:55 +0100
Message-ID: <20051127115155.GB18128@uio.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dmab5n$226n$1@news.hub.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0511261025140.16022@discord.dyndns.org>
<dmab5n$226n$1@news.hub.org>
On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 01:57:47PM -0500, Qingqing Zhou wrote:
> Don't forget TPCC (data > memory, with intensive updates). So the benchmarks
> in my mind include TPCC, TPCH and TPCW.
I'm lost in all those acronyms, but am I right in assuming that none of these
actually push the planner very hard? We keep on pushing that "PostgreSQL is a
lot better than MySQL when it comes to many joins and complex queries"
(mostly because the planner is a lot more mature -- does MySQL even keep
statistics yet?), but I'm not sure if there are any widely used benchmarks
available that actaully excercise that.
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: sgunderson@bigfoot.com
Subject: Re: Open request for benchmarking input
In-Reply-To: <20051127115155.GB18128@uio.no>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox