Subject | RE: [IBDI] SPEED-- Product Comparisons |
---|---|
Author | Leyne, Sean |
Post date | 2000-08-29T14:26:41Z |
Victor,
Like Ann, I think it's safe to say that we are all surprise by some of
the results, accordingly can we have more information.
Please provide as much detail as you can regarding the statements and
table structures used in the tests.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Victor M. Varela [mailto:netims1@...]
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 5:07 AM
To: IBDI@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [IBDI] SPEED-- Product Comparisons
This message can serve as comparison in speed quality.
Two days ago, I have used a tool called http_load to benchmark two web
servers
(Apache and Thttpd) and this last with PHP4 and Interbase 6, MySQL 3.22
and
PostgreSQL 7 (all out of the box and all free software, including
Linux).
These were the results.
This is the machine cpu info:
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 3
model name : Pentium II (Klamath)
stepping : 3
cpu MHz : 266.621612
cache size : 512 KB
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
sep_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 2
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mca
cmov
mmx
bogomips : 266.24
and only 64 Mb of RAM.
WEB SERVERS
1) Get 100 times a 50K file using 25 parallel conections:
http_load -parallel 25 -fetches 100 fichero_50k
Thttpd: 2.61857 sec
Apache: 3.69183 sec
2) Get max. times same file using 50 parallel conections in a minute
Thttpd: 22538 times
Apache: 14897 times
DBMS
a) insert 10000 records (structure id(number), name(100 chars))
b) show them (select and fetch)
c) update them (id = in + 50000)
d) delete table
Interbase 6 + Apache:
Insert: 34.7109 sec
Show: 10.348 sec
Update: 3.65113 sec
Delete: 1.87868 sec
Interbase 6 + Thttpd:
Insert: 30.9008 sec
Show: 7.44108 sec
Update: 3.9474 sec
Delete: 1.49845 sec
MySQL 3.22 + Thttpd:
Insert: 8.28551 sec
Show: 5.4 sec
Update: 1.15765 sec
Delete: 0.043181 sec
PostgreSQL 7.02 + Thttpd (ONLY 1000 RECORDS, 10000 GOES TIME OUT)
Insert: 30.9548 sec
Show: 0.332144 sec
Update: 0.757638 sec
Delete: 0.071223 sec
My conclusions (maybe stupid):
I was been talked that PostgreSQL 7 (that includes foreign keys) have
been
improved in speed. Somebody has told me that out of the box Postgres has
a
ratio of 33 inserts per second but it can be set to rise 450 per second.
33
inserts per second in default configuration seems to be a joke.
In my opinion, if you need transactions and foreign keys, the best
solution if
Interbase, otherwise your DBMS must be mySQL by its perfomance.
--
Programmer
Integracion de Metodologias y Sistemas (Spain)
http://www.netims.com
"Leyne, Sean" <sleyne@...> dijo:
Programmer
Integracion de Metodologias y Sistemas (Spain)
http://www.netims.com
Community email addresses:
Post message: IBDI@onelist.com
Subscribe: IBDI-subscribe@onelist.com
Unsubscribe: IBDI-unsubscribe@onelist.com
List owner: IBDI-owner@onelist.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.onelist.com/community/IBDI
Like Ann, I think it's safe to say that we are all surprise by some of
the results, accordingly can we have more information.
Please provide as much detail as you can regarding the statements and
table structures used in the tests.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Victor M. Varela [mailto:netims1@...]
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 5:07 AM
To: IBDI@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [IBDI] SPEED-- Product Comparisons
This message can serve as comparison in speed quality.
Two days ago, I have used a tool called http_load to benchmark two web
servers
(Apache and Thttpd) and this last with PHP4 and Interbase 6, MySQL 3.22
and
PostgreSQL 7 (all out of the box and all free software, including
Linux).
These were the results.
This is the machine cpu info:
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 3
model name : Pentium II (Klamath)
stepping : 3
cpu MHz : 266.621612
cache size : 512 KB
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
sep_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 2
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mca
cmov
mmx
bogomips : 266.24
and only 64 Mb of RAM.
WEB SERVERS
1) Get 100 times a 50K file using 25 parallel conections:
http_load -parallel 25 -fetches 100 fichero_50k
Thttpd: 2.61857 sec
Apache: 3.69183 sec
2) Get max. times same file using 50 parallel conections in a minute
Thttpd: 22538 times
Apache: 14897 times
DBMS
a) insert 10000 records (structure id(number), name(100 chars))
b) show them (select and fetch)
c) update them (id = in + 50000)
d) delete table
Interbase 6 + Apache:
Insert: 34.7109 sec
Show: 10.348 sec
Update: 3.65113 sec
Delete: 1.87868 sec
Interbase 6 + Thttpd:
Insert: 30.9008 sec
Show: 7.44108 sec
Update: 3.9474 sec
Delete: 1.49845 sec
MySQL 3.22 + Thttpd:
Insert: 8.28551 sec
Show: 5.4 sec
Update: 1.15765 sec
Delete: 0.043181 sec
PostgreSQL 7.02 + Thttpd (ONLY 1000 RECORDS, 10000 GOES TIME OUT)
Insert: 30.9548 sec
Show: 0.332144 sec
Update: 0.757638 sec
Delete: 0.071223 sec
My conclusions (maybe stupid):
I was been talked that PostgreSQL 7 (that includes foreign keys) have
been
improved in speed. Somebody has told me that out of the box Postgres has
a
ratio of 33 inserts per second but it can be set to rise 450 per second.
33
inserts per second in default configuration seems to be a joke.
In my opinion, if you need transactions and foreign keys, the best
solution if
Interbase, otherwise your DBMS must be mySQL by its perfomance.
--
Programmer
Integracion de Metodologias y Sistemas (Spain)
http://www.netims.com
"Leyne, Sean" <sleyne@...> dijo:
> All,on
>
> I will be making a presentation on Interbase 6.0 and Open-Source SQL
> DBMS at next week's Toronto Delphi Users Group meeting.
>
> As such I'm in the process of developing some comparison notes,
> regarding the direct competitors to IB (most noteably mySQL and
> PostgreSQL) and would appreciate some input from the community.
>
> To that end, I would like to use the accumulated knowledge to:
>
> - Identify other open-source SQL DBMS which you consider to be
> real competitors to IB (not a simple list from the open-source.org web
> site)
> - Outline the key differences which distinguish between these
> products and IB
>
> Accordingly, if you know of other open-source products, please provide
> their web site URL.
>
> Additionally, while I am navigating through the loads of information
> the respective web sites, I would appreciate of direct feedback from(or
> those of you who have had direct experience with the other products
> have done some recent product comparisons). I'm looking for is boththe
> good and the bad, as the products compare with IB.but
>
> In this manner, I hope to present as accurate a picture as possible --
> my intention is to be as fair as possible.
>
>
> Sean
>
> PS. Paul and Ann, I just went up to the mySQL web site and used
> their product comparison pages. To my mind, their are a number of
> factual errors related to IB capabilities, in some cases they seem
> glaring. Thought you should know. (I'd try to push from some
> corrections [they say they will correct error if prompted], myself,
> don't feel knowledeable enough to put forward an informed case)--
>
>
>
>
> Community email addresses:
> Post message: IBDI@onelist.com
> Subscribe: IBDI-subscribe@onelist.com
> Unsubscribe: IBDI-unsubscribe@onelist.com
> List owner: IBDI-owner@onelist.com
>
> Shortcut URL to this page:
> http://www.onelist.com/community/IBDI
>
>
>
Programmer
Integracion de Metodologias y Sistemas (Spain)
http://www.netims.com
Community email addresses:
Post message: IBDI@onelist.com
Subscribe: IBDI-subscribe@onelist.com
Unsubscribe: IBDI-unsubscribe@onelist.com
List owner: IBDI-owner@onelist.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.onelist.com/community/IBDI