--- On Mon, 8/16/10, Thom Brown <thom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This is quite a crude and unrealistic test (as you'd need a > set of > real-world data), but just did a quick test using > PostgreSQL 9.0 alpha > 4 and MySQL . I created a new database in both > PostgreSQL and MySQL. > Created the same table in both, and loaded identical data > (50 > paragraphs of lorem ipsum) and got it to insert the table's > contents > back into itself until both reached 65,536 rows. I > also did a VACUUM > in PostgreSQL and an OPTIMIZE TABLE in MySQL. > > PostgreSQL's table size shows 867 MB > MySQL's table size as MyISAM shows 2,542 MB > MySQL's table size as InnoDB shows: 3,576 MB > > Also bear in mind that MySQL's InnoDB engine doesn't > support full text > indexes, and when you can apply full text indexes, it only > returns a > result if it matches less than 50% of the total rows in the > table. > > PostgreSQL provides GIN and GiST types of index which are > used for > full text searches, but off the top of my head I don't know > if either > is actually equivalent to MySQL's implementation. I > suspect they're > quite different. Hopefully someone more familiar with > both system's > full text search features can answer that. > Thanks for doing the test. Your results of 867MB for Postgresql & 3,576 MB for InnoDB are surprising. Do you know why it is so much smaller for Postgresql? Are there any indexes? Are all Postgresql indexes based on GIN & GiST? I'm not using the database for full text search, would I still be using GIN/GiST indexes, or would I be using the plain old B+ tree? -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
