Message-ID: <42939E47.8030201@commandprompt.com>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 14:36:07 -0700
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Organization: Command Prompt, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-1.3.2 (X11/20050324)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Amit V Shah <ashah@tagaudit.com>
Cc: "'pgsql-performance@postgresql.org'" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Need help to decide Mysql vs Postgres
References: <0C072E7CC947D511AC9600A0CC7341200256CF04@xeon400.tagaudit.com>
In-Reply-To: <0C072E7CC947D511AC9600A0CC7341200256CF04@xeon400.tagaudit.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Amit V Shah wrote:
> Hi Josh,
> 
> Thanks for the prompt reply !! Actually migration is inevitable. We have a
> totally messed up schema, not normalized and stuff like that. So the goal of
> the migration is to get a new and better normalized schema. That part is
> done already. Now the decision point is, should we go with postgres or
> mysql. 

O.k. then I would ask myself this:

Would I trust my brand new data that I have put all this effort into, 
that finally looks the way that I want it to look, to a database that 
truncates information?

PostgreSQL is truly ACID compliant. Even if it is a little slower (which 
under normal use I don't find to be the case) wouldn't the reliability 
of PostgreSQL make up for say the 10% net difference in performance?

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


> 
> Thanks,
> Amit
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua D. Drake [mailto:jd@commandprompt.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 1:15 PM
> To: Amit V Shah
> Cc: 'pgsql-performance@postgresql.org'
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Need help to decide Mysql vs Postgres
> 
> 
> 
>>I am not trying to start a mysql vs postgres war so please dont
>>misunderstand me .... I tried to look around for mysql vs postgres
> 
> articles,
> 
>>but most of them said mysql is better in speed. However those articles
> 
> were
> 
>>very old so I dont know about recent stage. Please comment !!!
> 
> 
> It is my experience that MySQL is faster under smaller load scenarios. 
> Say 5 - 10 connections only doing simple SELECTS. E.g; a dymanic website.
> 
> It is also my experience that PostgreSQL is faster and more stable under
> consistent and heavy load. I have customers you regularly are using up 
> to 500 connections.
> 
> Note that alot of this depends on how your database is designed. Foreign 
> keys slow things down.
> 
> I think it would be important for you to look at your overall goal of 
> migration. MySQL is really not a bad product "IF" you are willing to 
> work within its limitations.
> 
> PostgreSQL is a real RDMS, it is like Oracle or DB2 and comes with a 
> comparable feature set. Only you can decide if that is what you need.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Joshua D. Drake
> Command Prompt, Inc.
> 
> 


-- 
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/