From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 20 04:25:51 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C93037B401 for ; Sun, 20 Jul 2003 04:25:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (internal.ext.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 317C143FBF for ; Sun, 20 Jul 2003 04:25:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sean@nxad.com) Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 3C19820F00; Sun, 20 Jul 2003 04:25:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 04:25:50 -0700 From: Sean Chittenden To: Dan Langille Message-ID: <20030720112550.GO24507@perrin.int.nxad.com> References: <200307191818.13516.paul@pathiakis.com> <3F19D98A.26914.45DCDA15@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F19D98A.26914.45DCDA15@localhost> X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org cc: Tom Samplonius Subject: Re: Tuning for PostGreSQL Database X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 11:25:51 -0000 > > > FreeBSD 4.8 or 5.1? > > > > Probably 5.1-RELEASE. > > I would recommend 4.8 over 5.1. Especially if you intend this to be > a production server. 5.1 is not ready for public consumption. Public consumption, yes. Production consumption, no. 5.1 is still pretty crippled in its current state because it's not Giant free yet. Once Giant free, however, 5.X will be much closer to production ready and should be quicker as a result of the fine grained locking (or so everyone hopes). The simple locking mechanism in 4.x does have some advantages in cases and should be a consistent performer on UP machines and under most loads.... whether or not 5.x over takes 4.X in terms of speed, is the subject of great debate, but many are optimistic that it will be at some point, just not at the moment. 5.X, will however (and without much doubt), scale much better than 4.X on multiple processor machines, though I'm not sure where that stands at the moment in terms of being completed and should likely be directed to current@ or questions@ instead of here. -sc -- Sean Chittenden