Jeremy Smith wrote:
>I have an extrememly query heavy site that I tried to switch from MySQL to
>PgSQL. And after spending literally a week reconfiguring thousands of
>queries and rewriting code, I finally had the pgSQL version of the site
>live, but when I had even a trickle of users on the site it was HORRENDOUSLY
>slow. Now, if I had optimized my code and my queries for another 3 weeks, I
>may have had something that was usable. But I will take the speed of MySQL
>and live without some of the niceties of PgSQL.
>From: David Griffiths [mailto:dgriffiths@stripped]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 1:28 PM
>To: david.best@stripped; Mark Warner; mysql@stripped
>Subject: Re: PgSQL vs MySQL
>As a DBA and someone who has worked both with PostgresQL and MySQL, I think
>I can answer this knowingly.
>First, MySQL is significantly faster than PostgresQL and Oracle.
>Second, MySQL is also a simpler database to set up and configure.
>Third, the documentation is better, and there are far more third party books
>Fourth, MySQL has a more impressive list of customers. Yes, there are some
>large PostgresQL customers (the .org domain system?), but none like Yahoo
>MySQL does not have triggers, stored procedures or views yet. Sub-selects
>should be out in six months.
>After fighting with PostgresQL to try to get it to use indexes, rewriting
>tonnes of queries, and still getting poor performance, I gave up on it. I
>prefer MySQL with InnoDB.
Well here is a case where some guy tried very hard to convert his app
from MySQL to PostgreSQL and the result was that he couldn't get MySQL
be as fast as PostgreSQL.