Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 255839F9509 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2007 14:00:23 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 39242-10 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2007 14:00:09 -0400 (AST) Received: from mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com (mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.199]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4A829F94F9 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2007 14:00:10 -0400 (AST) Received: from localhost (mail.craftmfg.com [198.144.43.23]) (AUTH: LOGIN wmoran, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by wingspan with esmtp; Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:00:08 -0500 id 0005643F.4734A028.000092F8 Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 14:04:54 -0500 From: Bill Moran To: Greg Smith Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs MySQL, and FreeBSD Message-Id: <20071109140454.924e94b1.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> In-Reply-To: References: <47344D43.5090506@geri.cc.fer.hr> <47347F9F.1070309@laliluna.de> Organization: Collaborative Fusion X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.5 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.001 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=BAYES_50=0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200711/146 X-Sequence-Number: 27561 On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 11:11:18 -0500 (EST) Greg Smith wrote: > On Fri, 9 Nov 2007, Sebastian Hennebrueder wrote: > > > If the queries are complex, this is understable. > > The queries used for this comparison are trivial. There's only one table > involved and there are no joins. It's testing very low-level aspects of > performance. Actually, what it's really showing is parallelism, and I've always expected PostgreSQL to come out on top in that arena. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com