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
>