>>>>> "Tani" == Tani Hosokawa <unknown@stripped> writes:
Tani> On Sat, 12 Jun 1999, Richard McLean wrote:
>> >I don't think you can really compare MySQL and DB2 :-) DB2 is like, the
>> >big iron of database engines. If you want a really good comparison, check
>> >out the latest issue of Unix Review's Performance Computing. A quotish
>> >line (I can't remember, I don't see the issue right here) "If you need
>> >100% uptime, scalability and subsecond responses on massive datasets you
>> >need DB2" (as opposed to Oracle and all others).
>> I realise they are TOTALLY different beasts, but...
>> Just looking at performance, how do they compare?
Tani> DB2 is really damn fast, and it's probably far faster than MySQL on
Tani> certain kinds of datasets, like large BLOBlike structures. It's obviously
Tani> had more work put into that kind of thing, 'coz that's what it's often
Tani> used for (databases with tens of millions of rows, or more -- terrabyte
Tani> databases). MySQL is blindingly fast on equivalent hardware for
Tani> smaller/simpler databases. That's largely personal opinion, and the
Tani> results of a decent amount of research into search engines and the like...
MySQL was designed from the start to handle big databases; The medium
table size we use MySQL for at TCX is about 7 millions of rows, and we
have tables of up to 84 million rows. The main reason we started to
develop MySQL in the first place was that no SQL server could perform
good enough on our tables (including DB2).
For the moment we have only used MySQL for up to 4G tables, but at least
up to this, it MySQL should be about 2-4 times faster than DB2.
When MySQL 3.23 is released we can start benchmarking on terrabyte
PS: The reason MySQL is faster is of course that we haven't
implemented some of the things that DB2 has to avoid the