Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark"
От | Dave Cramer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 0ECF3B27-A4B2-46DA-A5C6-551BADB8F2ED@fastcrypt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" ("Guido Neitzer" <guido.neitzer@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark"
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 23-Sep-06, at 9:00 AM, Guido Neitzer wrote: > I find the benchmark much more interesting in comparing PostgreSQL to > MySQL than Intel to AMD. It might be as biased as other "benchmarks" > but it shows clearly something that a lot of PostgreSQL user always > thought: MySQL gives up on concurrency ... it just doesn't scale well. > > cug > Before you get too carried away with this benchmark, you should review the previous comments on this thread. Not that I don't agree, but lets put things in perspective. 1) The database fits entirely in memory, so this is really only testing CPU, not I/O which should be taken into account IMO 2) The machines were not "equal" The AMD boxes did not have as much ram. DAVE > > On 9/23/06, mark@mark.mielke.cc <mark@mark.mielke.cc> wrote: >> Yep. From what I understand, Intel is 8 to 10 times the size of AMD. >> >> It's somewhat amazing that AMD even competes, and excellent for >> us, the >> consumer, that they compete well, ensuring that we get very fast >> computers, for amazingly low prices. >> >> But Intel isn't crashing down any time soon. Perhaps they became a >> little >> lazy, and made a few mistakes. AMD is forcing them to clean up. >> >> May the competition continue... :-) >> >> Cheers, >> mark > > > > -- > PostgreSQL Bootcamp, Big Nerd Ranch Europe, Nov 2006 > http://www.bignerdranch.com/news/2006-08-21.shtml > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend >
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: