| Subject | RE: [firebird-support] Need to optimize this query for my benchmark tools against Firebird / Mysql / Sqlite3 |
|---|---|
| Author | Leyne, Sean |
| Post date | 2010-12-20T02:44:57Z |
Stephane,
But from your own postings I understand that SQLLite has a number of significant issues in a multi-user/simultaneous operation environment.
It is COMPLETELY inappropriate to compare them.
If you want SQLLite performance use it! If you want scalable/multi-user/simultaneous operations use Firebird - but don't "whine" about performance when significant issues like multi-user operations are not supported by SQLLite -- you could get FANTASTIC performance from simple key/value databases but that doesn't mean that you would want to use it in place of Firebird.
Sean
P.S. As for MySQL, depending on the storage engine used, it is also an inappropriate candidate for comparison with Firebird -- the basic ISAM storage doesn't support transactions.
> I have done a benchmark tool to compare Mysql / Firebird / SqlIte3Respectfully, you seem to believe that SQlLite is the "benchmark" by which Firebird should be measured.
But from your own postings I understand that SQLLite has a number of significant issues in a multi-user/simultaneous operation environment.
It is COMPLETELY inappropriate to compare them.
If you want SQLLite performance use it! If you want scalable/multi-user/simultaneous operations use Firebird - but don't "whine" about performance when significant issues like multi-user operations are not supported by SQLLite -- you could get FANTASTIC performance from simple key/value databases but that doesn't mean that you would want to use it in place of Firebird.
Sean
P.S. As for MySQL, depending on the storage engine used, it is also an inappropriate candidate for comparison with Firebird -- the basic ISAM storage doesn't support transactions.