From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 5 14:48:55 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0751065786 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2009 14:48:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pieter@degoeje.nl) Received: from mx.utwente.nl (mx1.utsp.utwente.nl [130.89.2.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9111C8FC12 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2009 14:48:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nox-laptop.student.utwente.nl (nox-laptop.student.utwente.nl [130.89.170.109]) by mx.utwente.nl (8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id n95EF0eR008000 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:15:00 +0200 From: Pieter de Goeje To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:14:59 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200910051615.00313.pieter@degoeje.nl> X-UTwente-MailScanner-Information: Scanned by MailScanner. Contact icts.servicedesk@utwente.nl for more information. X-UTwente-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-UTwente-MailScanner-From: pieter@degoeje.nl X-Spam-Status: No Subject: Re: MySQL and PostgreSQL benchmarks, FreeBSD 7 vs. 8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:48:55 -0000 On Monday 05 October 2009 12:45:50 Gy=F6rgy Vilmos wrote: > Hello, > > I have two new articles: > First, MySQL history, which takes some older (major) versions from MySQL > and shows their performance on FreeBSD 8: > http://suckit.blog.hu/2009/10/03/mysql_history > > and an article, which compares PostgreSQL and MySQL performance between > FreeBSD 7 and 8: > http://suckit.blog.hu/2009/10/05/freebsd_8_is_it_worth_to_upgrade Very interesting. Good to see 8 is performing better than 7 :-) Did you see any performance change after implementing the correct cpu=20 topology? =2D-=20 Pieter de Goeje