Re: Why is Postgres so much better than MySQL?

["Jarod Wilson" <user=74@nabble.blu.org>]

 On Sunday 13 January 2008 10:33:25 pm [hidden email] wrote: 
> > I would say that the MySQL results on tweakers.net is the results of a 
> > poorly tuned MySQL. Without seeing the settings for both, the results 
> > are less than useless -- they can be downright misleading. 
> 
> Well, I can say from my own experience that MySQL falls apart under high 
> concurrency compared to PostgreSQL. 

First up, let me say that I don't really give a rip one way or the other which 
one is "better", and I'm not a DB person. I generally only touch a database 
when some program I'm working with needs a database, and I use whatever the 
project suggests. More often than not, its been MySQL (mythtv, maia mailguard 
and zabbix are the main projects that come to mind). 

However... An interesting tidbit I can throw out there in the "which one 
handles huge loads better" debate: 

Red Hat recently ditched Postgres for bugzilla.redhat.com, because it simply 
couldn't hold up to the load put on it. bugzilla.redhat.com now runs against 
a MySQL 5.1 database cluster. How much of the move was due to MySQL having 
better clustering/replication/etc vs. performance of a single instance, I 
have no idea, but I thought it was interesting nonetheless. 


-- 
Jarod Wilson 
[hidden email] 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is 
believed to be clean. 

_______________________________________________ 
Discuss mailing list 
[hidden email] 
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss