Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:36:44 -0800 From: "Andrew Hammond" <andrew.george.hammond@gmail.com> To: "Ivan Voras" <ivoras@fer.hr> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Progress on scaling of FreeBSD on 8 CPU systems Message-ID: <5a0a9d6f0702260936u3408f8d8rd4cde9234b2f7776@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <errjlr$a8p$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <20070224215508.GA41968@xor.obsecurity.org> <45E13410.7020505@he.iki.fi> <20070225071946.GA48242@xor.obsecurity.org> <45E14BAD.80909@he.iki.fi> <20070225084737.GA49231@xor.obsecurity.org> <errjlr$a8p$1@sea.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2/25/07, Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >>>> How does that compare to 6.2-RELEASE performance? > >>>> > >>> Much better. Fixing filedesc locking was key. > >>> > >>> > >> If there is extra cycles on the same hardware, a performance comparison > >> graph would be great. > > > > See the links in my posting ;) > > I think he means graphs between 6-stable and 7-current - it would be > very nice to see those on the same machine, mysql configuration, etc. > (at the very least to clearly show why people should upgrade :) ). Performance is a pretty weak reason to upgrade, unless of course you have a performance problem. The one thing that will really push me to upgrade is bug fixes to stuff that I use where the risk of exposure to the bug outweighs the risk and cost of upgrade. Andrew P.S. I know this is kinda trollish, but I don't understand the interest in MySQL as a load, particularly when there are more interesting loads such as PostgreSQL out there. Would you guys mind graphing the relative performance of PostgreSQL on 6.2-RELEASE and your patched version please?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5a0a9d6f0702260936u3408f8d8rd4cde9234b2f7776>