Thanks for taking the time to look over the tests in such detail! MySQL's EXPLAIN output says that it's using the indexes. PostgreSQL's EXPLAIN output says th

Thanks for taking the time to look over the tests in such detail! MySQL's EXPLAIN output says that it's using the indexes. PostgreSQL's EXPLAIN output says that it's _not_ (and from what I can tell so far, this is a deliberate design decision by PostgreSQL developers). r17 "loses" to MySQL on one query and "wins" on the other. So I agree that r17 has a much harder job competing against indexed data...but with r17 you didn't have to wait to create the index....not such a big deal for OLTP, a much bigger deal with OLAP. I would like to redo the bakeoff(s) with compressed InnoDB tables but as they can take several days to run and life is short, first I should focus on Hadoop as we both agree that is more relevant. Re the data size issue: the 54GB raw data set compresses to 28GB. The data generator I use creates data that's more random than the "real world" and so doesn't compress very well...makes life harder for r17, which is what I want. The smaller data set for the SSD test compresses to about 13GB, which isn't ideal I agree...I should have bought a larger SSD, I didn't think that MySQL would make so many large temporary files :). To mitigate this issue I ensured that the data set was _not_ cached before I ran the r17 script. I am very keen to find out the truth about r17's usefulness, thanks for your part in that. For the next bakeoff I'll provide more details about methods and machine behavior.