From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon May 24 00:07:41 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 154FC16A4CE
	for <freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 24 May 2004 00:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rms04.rommon.net (rms04.rommon.net [212.54.2.140])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB54143D41
	for <freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 24 May 2004 00:07:39 -0700 (PDT)	(envelope-from pete@he.iki.fi)
Received: from he.iki.fi (i2-138.rommon.fi [195.163.185.138])
	by rms04.rommon.net (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4O77V3v031768;
	Mon, 24 May 2004 10:07:31 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from pete@he.iki.fi)
Message-ID: <40B19F2E.8010804@he.iki.fi>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 10:07:26 +0300
From: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Thomas Hurst <tom.hurst@clara.net>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040521154458.01627688@127.0.0.1>
	<5.2.0.9.2.20040521154458.01627688@127.0.0.1>
	<5.2.0.9.2.20040522052606.0156fd70@mail.ojoink.com>
	<5.2.0.9.2.20040522100318.01598f50@mail.ojoink.com>
	<5.2.0.9.2.20040522135338.0158cc50@mail.ojoink.com>
	<5.2.0.9.2.20040523090659.01628af8@mail.ojoink.com>
	<5.2.0.9.2.20040523102747.015557e8@mail.ojoink.com>
	<5.2.0.9.2.20040523104834.01465598@mail.ojoink.com>
	<5.2.0.9.2.20040523114544.014d8150@mail.ojoink.com>
	<40B13BB3.3030807@freebsd.org> <20040524003505.GB2713@voi.aagh.net>
In-Reply-To: <20040524003505.GB2713@voi.aagh.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Why is MySQL nearly twice as fast on Linux?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 07:07:41 -0000

Thomas Hurst wrote:

>
>Only if you're only using one table.  While this is true in this
>benchmark, it isn't really relevent because we're only testing selects,
>which are pure reads.  There should be no table locking getting in the
>way; Linux's performance would seem to confirm this.
>
>  
>
I changed the test to use InnoDB table type and saw 50% performance 
improvement.

Pete