At 6:15 PM -0500 11/30/07, Greg Smith wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Guido Neitzer wrote:
>
>>Actually - In our test if just used with a similar load as pgbench
>>(e.g. typical web applications) Mac OS X 10.4.7 performed better
>>then Yellow Dog Linux (I was testing with G5 hardware) on the same
>>hardware as soon as more than about 90 concurrent clients were
>>simulated.
>
>At this point, that's just an interesting historical note. Yellow
>Dog is not a particularly good Linux compared with the ones that
>have gotten years worth of performance tuning for Intel/AMD
>processors. And you really can't extrapolate anything useful today
>from how it ran on a G5--that's two layers of obsolete. The
>comparisons that matter now are Intel+Mac OS vs. Intel+a popular
>Linux aimed at servers.
>
>As an unrelated note, I'm curious what you did with pgbench that you
>consider it a reasonable similation of a web application. The
>default pgbench transaction is very write-heavy, and the read-only
>option available is way too simple to be realistic. You'd need to
>pass in custom scripts to execute to get something that acted like a
>web app. pgbench is an unruly tool, and there's many ways to run it
>that gives results that aren't so useful.
If this is any help to anyone, I'm running Postgresql on an Intel
Xserve Mac OS X. Performance is more than fine for my usage. If
anyone would like me to run some benchmark code to test comparisons,
I'd be happy to do so.
-Owen
