Re: firebird X postgresql 8.1.2 windows, performance comparison

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





I hope tomorrow execute explain with the bitmapscan and seqscan enabled.
bitmapscans are almost always faster?

Like all the rest, they're just a tool, which works great when used in its intended purpose :

- Fetching just a few percent of the rows from a table is better served by an index scan - Fetching a lot of rows (>30-50%) from a table is better served by a seq scan
	- Bitmap scan comes in between and it's a very welcome addition.

Also Bitmap scan will save your life if you have complex searches, like if you run a dating site and have an index on blondes and an index on boob size, because it can use several indexes in complex AND/OR queries.

Common wisdom says simpler databases can be faster than postgres on simple queries.

	Reality check with pg 8.1 driven by PHP :

- SELECT 1
	mysql 5	~ 42 us
	postgres	~ 70 us

- SELECT * FROM users WHERE id=1
	mysql 5	~ 180 us
	postgres	~  160 us

Of course people doing stupid things, like using the database to keep a hit counter on their website which is updated on every hit, will say that postgres is slow.


[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux