From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 24 07:46:47 2004 Return-Path: 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 41E5E16A4CE for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 07:46:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta08-svc.ntlworld.com (mta08-svc.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.48]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89DFB43D2D for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 07:46:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tom.hurst@clara.net) Received: from voi.aagh.net ([81.104.55.176]) by mta08-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.37 201-229-121-137-20020806) with ESMTP id <20040524144545.VTKK21846.mta08-svc.ntlworld.com@voi.aagh.net> for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 15:45:45 +0100 Received: from freaky by voi.aagh.net with local (Exim 4.34; FreeBSD) id 1BSGi1-0000S5-5s for freebsd-threads@freebsd.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 15:45:45 +0100 Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 15:45:45 +0100 From: Thomas Hurst To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20040524144545.GA1378@voi.aagh.net> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040523103738.01563ed0@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040522052606.0156fd70@mail.ojoink.com> <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> <5.2.0.9.2.20040523103738.01563ed0@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040523200223.01583468@mail.ojoink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040523200223.01583468@mail.ojoink.com> Organization: Not much. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: Thomas Hurst 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 14:46:47 -0000 * JG (amd64list@jpgsworld.com) wrote: > At 01:18 AM 5/24/2004 +0100, you wrote: > > Well, super-smack isn't that effecient; with 30 clients you'll be > > getting 30 copies of it (perl I think) > > It's written in C++ ... you might want to minimally know what language > an application is written in before you pass judgements on it or make > statements of it's efficiency :-/ Hm... not sure where I got perl from; I even remember compiling it. It still sucks quite a bit of CPU, either way, although top could be misleading me. Still, if we're going to be comparing with results from Linux which are near the peak of it's performance curve we don't want to be running in the middle of our much lower one. > > sucking down millions of records > > Millions eh? What's 30x10000? Right; I was somehow under the impression it was selecting multiple records; I associated the relatively high CPU usage from super-smack with fetching the result set, when really it's got plenty to do just sending queries. > No more help from you please. No, at least not late at night after not having a caffeine fix for about 8 hours. It doesn't help that Debian's rotting my brain now *sulk* -- Thomas 'Freaky' Hurst - freaky@aagh.net - http://www.aagh.net/