> That's why I was looking for a more balanced benchmark that exercises > said capabilities. OK, here's the thing, I will give you *one* sample issue to think about, as an illustration of the kinds of differences there are. - PostgresQL uses MVCC instead of row or page locking, which means only writer vs writer locks, which means in many situations less contention and better throughput as your concurrent load goes up. - But it also means slower count(*) and no covering indexes. (Keeping multiple versions of index pages would be too slow for many other operations, so PG has go to the table pages to check which rows are actually visible in the current transaction.) See? Overall, PG performs very well and is certainly comparable to the "big boys" on the same hardware. But the strengths & weaknesses can be *very* specific to particular queries. -- Scott Ribe scott_ribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.killerbytes.com/ (303) 722-0567 voice -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
