Re: PostgreSQL vs. InnoDB performance

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. InnoDB performance
Date: 2005-06-02 22:44:03
Message-ID: 429F8BB3.90801@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On a particular system, loading 1 million rows (100 bytes, nothing
> fancy) into PostgreSQL one transaction at a time takes about 90
> minutes.

Doing the same in MySQL/InnoDB takes about 3 minutes. InnoDB
> is supposed to have a similar level of functionality as far as the
> storage manager is concerned, so I'm puzzled about how this can be.
> Does anyone know whether InnoDB is taking some kind of questionable
> shortcuts it doesn't tell me about?

What about fsync/opensync and wal segments?

What happens if we turn off fsync entirely?

The client interface is DBI. This
> particular test is supposed to simulate a lot of transactions happening
> in a short time, so turning off autocommit is not relevant.
>
> As you might imagine, it's hard to argue when the customer sees these
> kinds of numbers. So I'd take any FUD I can send back at them. :)
>

--
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/

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2005-06-03 00:05:32 Re: PostgreSQL vs. InnoDB performance
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2005-06-02 22:36:29 PostgreSQL vs. InnoDB performance