Re: PostgreSQL vs MySQL Throughdown! Teams?

["Matt Shields-5" <user=70@nabble.blu.org>]

 On Jan 14, 2008 9:02 AM,  <[hidden email]> wrote: 
> It is beginning to sound like people have a few things to say about the 
> matter. There are lots of benchmarks out there and no one knows what to 
> trust, so here's my proposal. 
> 
> We have a MySQL team and a PostgreSQL team. The two teams will develop a 
> single benchmark that will function exactly the same on both systems. 
> Something with a lot of concurrency and a balance between complex and 
> simple queries. 
> 
> Once we get the benchmark written, the two teams will optimize their query 
> set and database, and we'll run the benchmark with one process, then two,. 
> then four, then eight, up to about 128 processes. We can publish all the 
> code and results on the BLU web site. 
> 
> I think this can be done pretty easily, I have a lot of infrastructure 
> already in place to build the benchmark and I my development machine has a 
> good/fast SATA drive, dual core 64 AMD with 4G RAM. I have a few other 32 
> bit machines that can act as clients. 
> 
> If anyone has a larger infrastructure and is interesting in participating, 
> that would be awesome as well. 
> 
> Wouldn't we all like to have this question answered in a way we can all 
> agree upon? Anyone interested? 
> 
> 
> Here's my general thoughts: 
> 
> Use the TIGER U.S. database to find the location of an address. If it is 
> found, a table of locations will be updated to include the address. 
> 
> Query the locations table to find all the addresses with 25 mile radius of 
> the address. 
> 
> Query the locations table to find all the addresses with 50 mile radius of 
> the address. 
> 
> The source data for the client will not be 100% random, most will be 
> generated from the TIGER database itself so we have a large percentage of 
> controlled input. 
> 
> About 10% of the addresses will be randomly generated addresses. 
> 
> Anyone have any comments/additions? 
>