X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831AD11F674B for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:31:32 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 23175-05 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:31:31 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from peufeu.com (boutiquenumerique.com [82.67.9.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75ECF11F6604 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:31:28 -0400 (AST) Received: (qmail 32181 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2006 23:31:26 +0200 Received: from boutiquenumerique.com (HELO apollo13) (82.67.9.10) by boutiquenumerique.com with SMTP; 30 Mar 2006 23:31:26 +0200 To: "Scott Marlowe" , "Chris Browne" Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Decide between Postgresql and Mysql (help of References: <1143559902.1241.16.camel@servidor> <1143575445.3625.87.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> <200603291901.59320.listsubscriptions@oghma.on.ca> <442B4138.8030207@modgraph-usa.com> <60acb7rgnr.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com> <1143746489.26940.34.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 23:31:25 +0200 From: PFC Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=utf-8 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1143746489.26940.34.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> User-Agent: Opera M2/8.51 (Linux, build 1462) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.113 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113] X-Spam-Score: 0.113 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/631 X-Sequence-Number: 18068 >> And yes, it does become natural to ask "why not write CGIs in ASM?" >> ;-) Personally, I'd code it in brainfuck, for aesthetic reasons. > And that, nowadays, is generally the state of web development. It's not > the language you're using to write it in, it's how efficiently you're > using your database. We can probably tweak the system we're testing now > and get more from our databases by adjusting how hibernate hits them, > and the types of queries that it's throwing, but in the long run, the > bottleneck will always be the database server, because we can throw > relatively small amounts of money at the other layers if they happen to > be bogging down. Not so much with the database. So, one wonders why some use 70's languages like Java instead of Lisp or Python, which are slower, but a lot more powerful and faster to develop in... (and don't have hibernate, which is a big bonus) (why do you think I don't like Java ?)