Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:55:20 -0000 From: "Steven Hartland" <killing@multiplay.co.uk> To: "Alban Hertroys" <dalroi@solfertje.student.utwente.nl>, "Kris Kennaway" <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Martin <list@manuelmartini.it>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD mysql Benchmark on 4BSD/ULE scheduler and i386/amd64 Message-ID: <009c01c765d3$759f0890$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> References: <20070313154729.1ec6abb7@DELOREAN.manuelmartini.it><20070313194206.GA5957@crodrigues.org><20070313195756.GA11679@xor.obsecurity.org><20070313211908.59de6504@DELOREAN.manuelmartini.it><20070313214559.GB13079@xor.obsecurity.org> <330A1347-2309-417E-83B5-5B2CE005B9C8@solfertje.student.utwente.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alban Hertroys wrote:
> Sorry, couldn't resist...
Being a troll?
> This being mysql, the number of processors isn't going to matter
> much, no matter how many connections you have. Mysql doesn't scale
> very well to multiple cpu's.
You seem to have been paying no attention at all to any of the mysql
performance benchmarks and optimisation efforts that have being going
on recently.
> Not to say that PostgreSQL is the ultimate benchmark instead of
> mysql, just a better one. Of course they both have their uses, but
> IMO mysql is loosing terrain fast.
Any benchmark which looks to closely emulate "real life work" is
valid, just be because "you" dont use or like a particular product
doesnt make it any less suitable for testing / benchmarking. I'm sure
if you took a survey of how many people are using mysql vs PostgreSQL
it would show that the former is much more popular DB. No this doesnt
make it better but it does make it a more suitable candidate for
performance work as the benefits will benefit more people and more
systems.
Obviously this doesnt mean that optimisations for DB X wont benefit
DB Y, or other apps for that matter, as its likely they will.
> [1] I really mean it doesn't compare. PostgreSQL provides more (and
> IMHO better) features, and can be faster under the right
> circumstances (usually complex queries or concurrent writes). It also
> scales almost linearly to the number of cpu's, provided there are
> enough simultaneous connections.
It also has a "known" bottleneck to its performance on FreeBSD see
earlier comments in other threads by Kris on this which clearly
limits any benefit gained from using it as a benchmark.
Steve
================================================
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it.
In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337
or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?009c01c765d3$759f0890$b3db87d4>