>FWIW, my own experiments with tests like this suggest that PG is at worst about 2x slower than mysql for trivial queries. If you'd reported a result in that ballpark I'd have accepted it as probably real. 6x I don't believe though ... OTOH, my tests using BenchmarkSQL (http://sourceforge.net/projects/benchmarksql) shows that PG can deliver up to 8x more transactions/minute than a well-known proprietary DB on similar hardware (with 100 concurrent connections) - can't post the results due to licence restrictions of the proprietary vendor though. In fact, PG on a single SCSI disk machine did even beat the other DB when the other DB had a fully equipped CX200 Dell/EMC SAN, if only with 30% this time. Note that in the latter case, the other DB is unable to use async IO due to problems running on linux kernel 2.4.9. And yes, PG was running with fsync on. It's only a benchmark though, and real-life useage is what counts in the end (after all). Regards, Mikael
