The lines are crossing! PostgreSQL outperforms SQLite on short and medium queries, but whatsapp philippines number has a lot of problems with the annual query, which takes almost twice as long as SQLite. In case you think this is a coincidence, I have repeated these tests several times and can confirm that these results are correct. Here are the graphs for 2 and 4 clients on this production server. PostgreSQL / SQLite comparison table PostgreSQL / SQLite comparison table Although the shapes of the curves are nearly identical across all concurrency levels, just looking at the Y-axis scales shows that on this platform, response times are much more affected by concurrency than on my laptop.
For the annual query with four concurrent clients, response times were extremely slow, around 14 seconds for PostgreSQL and 8 seconds for SQLite. Are PostgreSQL and SQLite affected by concurrency in the same way? Let's look at them separately to find out. The following chart shows PostgreSQL's performance over the four periods with 1, 2, and 4 concurrent clients. PostgreSQL Graph This shows that for this database things get out of hand for large queries, but for small and medium sized queries response times are relatively stable. Below is the same graph for SQLite: SQLite Chart Nothing to do with it, right? With a single processor, concurrency plays a role in SQLite, even for small and medium-sized queries.