Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB3871337BBA for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:51:39 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28035-01-3 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:51:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1885E1337B82 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:51:18 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id p3QFpHep007812; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:51:17 -0400 (EDT) To: J Sisson cc: Rob Wultsch , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Time to put theory to the test? In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to J Sisson message dated "Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:13:17 -0500" Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:51:17 -0400 Message-ID: <7811.1303833077@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201104/358 X-Sequence-Number: 43420 J Sisson writes: > Granted, my knowledge of PostgreSQL (and even MSSQL) far surpasses my > knowledge of MySQL, but if InnoDB has such amazing benefits as being > crash safe, and even speed increases in some instances, why isn't > InnoDB default? It *is* default in the most recent versions (5.5 and up). They saw the light eventually. I wonder whether being bought out by Oracle had something to do with that attitude adjustment ... regards, tom lane