Thread: Re: [HACKERS] Platform Testing - Cygwin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD [mailto:ZeugswetterA@spardat.at]
> Sent: 13 December 2001 15:47
> To: lockhart@fourpalms.org; Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; pgsql-cygwin@postgresql.org
> Subject: RE: [CYGWIN] [HACKERS] Platform Testing - Cygwin
>
>
> > > Right, 7.2b4 passes *all* tests both parallel and
> > sequential on Windows 2000
> > > Server.
> > > On XP Pro, and by the sounds of it, any other non-server
> releases of
> > > Windows, parallel tests will fail randomly due to Winsock
> > backlog limit of 5
> > > on these systems (as pointed out by Jason Tishler and
> documented in
> > > FAQ_MSWIN).
> >
> > So ignore the question I sent a minute ago. Thanks for the report!!
>
> Problem with this report is, that it most certainly is on a
> single CPU
> system. Problems currently only reproduce on SMP, if I read the mails
> correctly.
>
> Andreas
>

Although the original test was in Windows XP on a single processor box, the
final tests that all passed were on Windows 2000 Server running on a Dual
PIII 933MHz box with 1Gb of RAM. The motherboard is an MSI Pro 694D.

Regards, Dave.

Dave Page wrote:

>Although the original test was in Windows XP on a single processor box, the
>final tests that all passed were on Windows 2000 Server running on a Dual
>PIII 933MHz box with 1Gb of RAM. The motherboard is an MSI Pro 694D.
>
Has anyone done any tests comparing PostgreSQL on Win32 and *NIX
platforms on
same/similar hardware ?

I suspect that the initial connect could be slower on Win32 due to
reported slowness of
fork() there, but are there other issues ?

-------------------
Hannu