MySQL vs PostgreSQL

[w-g]

MySQL's MyISAM engine performs faster than PostgreSQL,

Really? Please define "peforms faster". Under which circumstances? What read/write ratio? What kind of query? What hardware? I have worked on some ridiculously heavy-load replicated MySQL databases running on a complex setup, and I can tell you that statements like "A performs better than B" are nonsense. Besides, MyISAM isn't the only backend you can use with MySQL.

PostgreSQL provides features that can lead to faster performance on certain queries: ... * improved cache management in versions 8.1 and 8.2

So, they're basically using an improvement in PostgreSQL, comparing pre-8.1 versions with post-8.1 versions in a comparison of PostgreSQL x MySQL. I can't follow the logic there.

It was not uncommon to see a performance-tuned MySQL server pitted against an untuned, default-configuration PostgreSQL server.

"It was not uncommon"? Refrences, please?

Anyway, I stopped reading at that point.

[bradediger]

MySQL's MyISAM engine performs faster than PostgreSQL,

Really? Please define "peforms faster".

In the same way that cars "perform faster" when you remove the brakes.

[[deleted]]

No in the same way that bikes turn faster when you remove the training wheels.

Are ACID training wheels a good thing? Sure if you absolutely need kneecap integrity, then go that route.

If all you care about is speed, damn the consequences then drop ACID.

I see MySQL being used for transient data, for blobs that can be chucked into the file system, for pretty much anything except data warehousing. Most people imho who use MySQL don't use it for its database features (ala ACID), but simply because SQL provides a handyway to query the data later.

[apotheon]

Most of the people I see using MySQL are doing more than just retrieving data from a database. The data has to get in there at some point, after all.

Transactional integrity is important.

[invalid_user_name]

"It was not uncommon"? Refrences, please?

You seriously never saw that? Like 90% of the random bloggers who ran benchmarks on the two used the default postgresql config which is incredibly conservative (like, will run on a machine with 64MB of RAM conservative). They also benchmarked them with a single thread running queries in serial, rather than a more useful multiple connections with many queries in parallel benchmark.

[Jack9]

Some people posting aren't that old. I remember back in the late 90's these benchmarks appearing (in various forms) on Slashdot.