benchmarking postgres

Why not attach a hundred users and run the same test. MySQL will be
licking *everyone's* boots. Each and every program listed would
positively slam them into the floor and grind their face in the dirt
(unless they have made some monumental improvements recently).

If a single user database is wanted, MySQL is just the ticket. When it
gets a bunch of users and has to do complex stuff, it goes into the
toilet.

As far as benchmarks go, TPC-C, TPC-H, TPC-W and TPC-R would be
interesting. Trying to beat a toy database under silly conditions is a
waste of time.

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Kings-Lynne [mailto:chriskl@familyhealth.com.au]
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 10:40 PM
To: Hackers
Subject: [HACKERS] benchmarking postgres

Look at this: (top one)

http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html

Does anyone feel like running the MySQL benchmark against postgres 7.2
to
see if there's been a real speed improvement??

Chris

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org

On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Dann Corbit wrote:

Why not attach a hundred users and run the same test. MySQL will be
licking *everyone's* boots. Each and every program listed would
positively slam them into the floor and grind their face in the dirt
(unless they have made some monumental improvements recently).

http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html

Does anyone feel like running the MySQL benchmark against postgres 7.2
to
see if there's been a real speed improvement??

Why don't we have some pretty graphs like that on the postgres site? I
agree that the mysql tests against single user are useless, but users see
the FUD of pretty pictures and are mislead. If mysql is giving out
information like that, shouldn't we also have some pretty pictures? If
they exist, i've never seen them on the main site.

Thoughts..

- Brandon

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
c: 646-456-5455 h: 201-798-4983
b. palmer, bpalmer@crimelabs.net pgp:crimelabs.net/bpalmer.pgp5

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

Look at this: (top one)

http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html

Does anyone feel like running the MySQL benchmark against postgres 7.2 to
see if there's been a real speed improvement??

Chris

These guys are just A$%$%holes. We have to come up with a benchmark which shows
the the difference between a stupid little file-locking single user toy, and a
real tansactional system.

Maybe we too can put in little snide remarks about MySQL.

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, mlw wrote:

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

Look at this: (top one)

http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html

Does anyone feel like running the MySQL benchmark against postgres 7.2 to
see if there's been a real speed improvement??

Chris

These guys are just A$%$%holes. We have to come up with a benchmark which shows
the the difference between a stupid little file-locking single user toy, and a
real tansactional system.

Maybe we too can put in little snide remarks about MySQL.

If someone comes up with a simple and objective comparison (preferably
with the nice color pictures mentioned previously :) and it's professional
looking (no childish slams, etc) I'll be happy to put it on the website.

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev@michvhf.com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, mlw wrote:

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

Look at this: (top one)

http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html

Does anyone feel like running the MySQL benchmark against postgres 7.2 to
see if there's been a real speed improvement??

Chris

These guys are just A$%$%holes. We have to come up with a benchmark which shows
the the difference between a stupid little file-locking single user toy, and a
real tansactional system.

Maybe we too can put in little snide remarks about MySQL.

Now, let's be a bit sensible, here. MySQL is a great product, if you want
a single-user SQL interface to flat files. It is blazingly fast when it
comes to retrieving information in an environment where there is little or
no data change.

We all know the strenghts of postgresql. It is a fully-featured
transactional database. MySQL is not, but it is neither stupid, nor a
toy. It has its purposes, as does postgresql.

Ola

--
Ola Sundell
ola@miranda.org - olas@wiw.org - ola.sundell@personalchemistry.com
http://miranda.org/~ola

On Mi� 13 Feb 2002 09:57, Ola Sundell wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, mlw wrote:

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

Look at this: (top one)

http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html

Does anyone feel like running the MySQL benchmark against postgres 7.2
to see if there's been a real speed improvement??

Chris

These guys are just A$%$%holes. We have to come up with a benchmark which
shows the the difference between a stupid little file-locking single user
toy, and a real tansactional system.

Maybe we too can put in little snide remarks about MySQL.

Now, let's be a bit sensible, here. MySQL is a great product, if you want
a single-user SQL interface to flat files. It is blazingly fast when it
comes to retrieving information in an environment where there is little or
no data change.

We all know the strenghts of postgresql. It is a fully-featured
transactional database. MySQL is not, but it is neither stupid, nor a
toy. It has its purposes, as does postgresql.

What you say is true, but in that case, they shouldn't make benchmarks
comparing the two.

Saludos... :-)

--
Porqu� usar una base de datos relacional cualquiera,
si pod�s usar PostgreSQL?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mart�n Marqu�s | mmarques@unl.edu.ar
Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica
Universidad Nacional
del Litoral
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Ola Sundell wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, mlw wrote:

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

Look at this: (top one)

http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html

Does anyone feel like running the MySQL benchmark against postgres 7.2 to
see if there's been a real speed improvement??

Chris

These guys are just A$%$%holes. We have to come up with a benchmark which shows
the the difference between a stupid little file-locking single user toy, and a
real tansactional system.

Maybe we too can put in little snide remarks about MySQL.

Now, let's be a bit sensible, here. MySQL is a great product, if you want
a single-user SQL interface to flat files. It is blazingly fast when it
comes to retrieving information in an environment where there is little or
no data change.

The snide remarks on the page about things not working was a bit much. I was
ticked off. On a more serious note, MySQL isn't even really SQL. It supports a
lot of the syntax, but none of the intentions. Things like sub-selects are
vital to being able to model a problem. Transactions are vital to predictable
behavior. High concurrency is vital to "real" performance.

I have said it at least a hundred times before, I have never been able to
finish a project started in MySQL. I always come across something that the
database *must* do, but MySQL can't.

It is clear that anyone who runs a single user benchmark against a database
server capable of multiple connections is not testing their system in its
intended mode of use. They are resorting to the worst sort of microsoftian
benchmark FUD.

We all know the strenghts of postgresql. It is a fully-featured
transactional database. MySQL is not, but it is neither stupid, nor a
toy. It has its purposes, as does postgresql.

What purpose does MySQL fit? It isn't very good at doing the sorts of things
SQL is supposed to do and there are faster database libraries (ala Berkeley
DB). What would be the point of using MySQL for anything?

Vince Vielhaber wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, mlw wrote:

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

Look at this: (top one)

http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html

Does anyone feel like running the MySQL benchmark against postgres 7.2 to
see if there's been a real speed improvement??

Chris

These guys are just A$%$%holes. We have to come up with a benchmark which shows
the the difference between a stupid little file-locking single user toy, and a
real tansactional system.

Maybe we too can put in little snide remarks about MySQL.

If someone comes up with a simple and objective comparison (preferably
with the nice color pictures mentioned previously :) and it's professional
looking (no childish slams, etc) I'll be happy to put it on the website.

Has anyone ported "pgbench" to MySQL? That would be the perfect tool to show
the differences. Tom even has some scripts to make charts from it.

This comes up about once every 6 months. Please take it off HACKERS to
ADVOCACY (do we have such a thing?), or some such. Various members of
the PostgreSQL community have tried to work with the MySQL people in
the past to address 'issues' with their 'benchmark': it never works out.

Ross

Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:

Does anyone feel like running the MySQL benchmark against postgres 7.2 to
see if there's been a real speed improvement??

For anyone looking for a real benchmark, check out the OSDB project
(http://osdb.sourceforge.net). It's based on the fairly respected AS3AP
benchmark. The drawback is that you can't easily generate the test data,
yet. I've been working on that, but I sort of ran out of algebra for a
while. For now you can download some test data sets, but note that
they're really too small to run the benchmark accurately.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net