Given all this performance discussion,  has anyone seen any numbersregarding the 
speed of PostgreSQl vs Oracle?  

Thanks.
- Brandon

--
sixdegrees.com
w 212.375.2688
c 917.723.1981

Tue, 15 Aug 2000 12:08:17 -0400
merlin <merlin@sixdegrees.com>
Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New Benchmark Tests
> Given all this performance discussion,  has anyone seen any numbers regarding 
> the speed of PostgreSQl vs Oracle?

Um, er...

No, but perhaps you could consider "one of the leading closed source
database products" which was compared in the Great Bridge test to be
similar in speed and features to The Database You Have Named. *hint
hint*

                  - Thomas

Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:56:04 +0000
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New Benchmark
 Tests
Is "Uracle" called "Proprietary 1" or "Proprietary 2"? I can't remember :-)

And which other RDBMS is proprietary? Could it be M$ql Server....?

Hint, hint
Poul L. Christiansen

merlin wrote:

> Given all this performance discussion,  has anyone seen any numbersregarding the
> speed of PostgreSQl vs Oracle?
>
> Thanks.
> - Brandon
>
> --
> sixdegrees.com
> w 212.375.2688
> c 917.723.1981


Tue, 15 Aug 2000 18:17:46 +0100
"Poul L. Christiansen" <plc@faroenet.fo>
Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New Benchmark
 Tests
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, merlin wrote:

> Given all this performance discussion, has anyone seen any
> numbersregarding the speed of PostgreSQl vs Oracle?

Oracle and MS SQL Server must have been the two
"leading commercial RDBMSes" mentioned in the
article.

The licencing of both of those expressly forbids
publishing benchmark results (including, we can
probably assume from the wording of the article,
even referring directly to such).

That said, it would be nice to see some actual
numbers and configurations for the postgresql end
of things;  What hardware was used?  What versions
of what system software?  What OS tuning was done?
What parameters were supplied to postgres?

Matthew.


Tue, 15 Aug 2000 18:26:25 +0100 (BST)
Matthew Kirkwood <weejock@ferret.lmh.ox.ac.uk>
Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New Benchmark
 Tests
There are a thousand RDBMS products that might fall under that heading, the
reason the names weren't published is that most commercial RDBMS product
prohibit the publishing of benchmarks when you buy it. The guys that did
this benchmark weren't trying to hide who it was just for the sake of hiding
it, they really can't *legally* say.

I know some people that have benchmarked Oracle and PostgreSQL... Oracle
won, that's all I'll say..

People still need to use whatever RDBMS makes their life easier, one could
make an argument for virtually all existing products (commercial or not) on
that product's individual strengths and weaknesses.

-Mitch
----- Original Message -----
From: "Poul L. Christiansen" <plc@faroenet.fo>
To: "merlin" <merlin@sixdegrees.com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 10:17 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Open Source Database Routs Competition in New
Benchmark Tests


> Is "Uracle" called "Proprietary 1" or "Proprietary 2"? I can't remember
:-)
>
> And which other RDBMS is proprietary? Could it be M$ql Server....?
>
> Hint, hint
> Poul L. Christiansen
>
> merlin wrote:
>
> > Given all this performance discussion,  has anyone seen any
numbersregarding the
> > speed of PostgreSQl vs Oracle?
> >
> > Thanks.
> > - Brandon
> >
> > --
> > sixdegrees.com
> > w 212.375.2688
> > c 917.723.1981
>
>


Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:29:09 -0700
"Mitch Vincent" <mitch@venux.net>
Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New Benchmark  Tests
At 06:17 PM 8/15/00 +0100, Poul L. Christiansen wrote:
>Is "Uracle" called "Proprietary 1" or "Proprietary 2"? I can't remember :-)
>
>And which other RDBMS is proprietary? Could it be M$ql Server....?

Informix, possibly, I know they have the restrictive clause regarding
benchmarking in their contract.



- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com>
  Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
  Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
  http://donb.photo.net.

Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:30:21 -0700
Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com>
Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New
  Benchmark  Tests
Hi Matthew,

We'll pull together some more background info on the specifics you
mentioned, and put them on the website shortly.

Regards,
Ned



Matthew Kirkwood wrote:

> That said, it would be nice to see some actual
> numbers and configurations for the postgresql end
> of things;  What hardware was used?  What versions
> of what system software?  What OS tuning was done?
> What parameters were supplied to postgres?
>
> Matthew.


Tue, 15 Aug 2000 19:26:47 -0400
Ned Lilly <ned@greatbridge.com>
Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New
 BenchmarkTests
this may be interesting ned.. and others..

http://www.devshed.com/BrainDump/MySQL_Benchmarks/

it will probably just fuel a fire. but at the same
time something can probably be learned.

jeff

On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Ned Lilly wrote:

> Hi Matthew,
> 
> We'll pull together some more background info on the specifics you
> mentioned, and put them on the website shortly.
> 
> Regards,
> Ned
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew Kirkwood wrote:
> 
> > That said, it would be nice to see some actual
> > numbers and configurations for the postgresql end
> > of things;  What hardware was used?  What versions
> > of what system software?  What OS tuning was done?
> > What parameters were supplied to postgres?
> >
> > Matthew.
> 

Jeff MacDonald,

-----------------------------------------------------
PostgreSQL Inc		| Hub.Org Networking Services
jeff@pgsql.com		| jeff@hub.org
www.pgsql.com		| www.hub.org
1-902-542-0713		| 1-902-542-3657
-----------------------------------------------------
Fascimile : 1 902 542 5386
IRC Nick  : bignose


Tue, 15 Aug 2000 23:47:01 -0300 (ADT)
Jeff MacDonald <jeff@pgsql.com>
Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New
 BenchmarkTests
At 11:47 PM 8/15/00 -0300, Jeff MacDonald wrote:
>this may be interesting ned.. and others..
>
>http://www.devshed.com/BrainDump/MySQL_Benchmarks/

He's full of shit the first moment he talks about them always trying
to design fair tests.

Sorry ... I would love to see just one example where DEFAULT
table locking is better (as he claims) - in PG I can of course
lock a table if I want.

I was recently asked to check out an Oracle site that was dying
due to system loads escalating > 70.0  (the decimal point, sadly,
is properly placed).  Turns out they were doing by-hand pessimistic
table locking because they didn't understand that Oracle wasn't
MySQL, so to speak, and under load (generating a digest) threads
stacked up (not helped by an Oracle client library bug that causes
weird spinlock deadlocks, not discovered by me but earlier by ardDigita).

Pessimistic locking is available in PG and real RDBMS systems like
Oracle.  That's not proof that pessimistic locking is the right thing
to do as not only your default locking but your only locking.

Monty's not fair, and I think most people here know it.  They lie,
obfuscate, refuse to update comparision charts to new versions, etc
etc etc.

I wouldn't trust him to pack my parachute, that's for sure.



- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com>
  Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
  Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
  http://donb.photo.net.

Tue, 15 Aug 2000 20:39:36 -0700
Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com>
Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New
  BenchmarkTests
(re-posted to GENERAL)

All,

Please see http://www.greatbridge.com/news/p_081620001.html for more
background info about how the tests were conducted.

Best,

Ned Lilly
VP Hacker Relations
Great Bridge


Matthew Kirkwood wrote:

> That said, it would be nice to see some actual
> numbers and configurations for the postgresql end
> of things;  What hardware was used?  What versions
> of what system software?  What OS tuning was done?
> What parameters were supplied to postgres?
>
> Matthew.


Wed, 16 Aug 2000 03:10:32 -0400
Ned Lilly <ned@greatbridge.com>
Re: [HACKERS] Open Source Database Routs Competition in New
	BenchmarkTests