| From: | Jochem van Dieten <jochemd(at)oli(dot)tudelft(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL vs. InnoDB performance |
| Date: | 2005-06-03 10:24:50 |
| Message-ID: | 42A02FF2.2030107@oli.tudelft.nl |
| 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?
MySQL/InnoDB offers the same knobs to force commits to disk as
PostgreSQL does. Look at innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit and
innodb_flush_method:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/innodb-start.html
Jochem
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Leonardo Francalanci | 2005-06-03 10:46:11 | Re: PostgreSQL vs. InnoDB performance |
| Previous Message | Shaun Clements | 2005-06-03 09:39:56 | Re: Automate Postgres Backup In windows -> resolved |