Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 09:19:28 -0400 From: Paul Pathiakis <paul@pathiakis.com> To: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tuning Postgresql on FreeBSD 5.1 Message-ID: <200308260919.28371.paul@pathiakis.com> In-Reply-To: <3F4B55A1.6000601@gmx.net> References: <200308250929.32143.paul@pathiakis.com> <3F4B55A1.6000601@gmx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ummm....seriously? Well, after you get all the marginal parameters on the compilation and everything else cleared away, you have the "platform of choice". This is what development takes place on "in-house" so to speak. The developers become a lot more familiar through symbiosis with OS developers and sysadmins. They get to know a lot more about how to tune and performance enhance the machines on that platform. Usually, (not an absolute, only a fool speaks in absolutes) there's just a lot more understood about the OS and tuning is at a higher level and performance is better overall. (We can split hairs on this philosophy all day, however, this is just my opinion and response to your query. I REALLY DON'T want to start a thread on this.) Also, thanks to everyone whose responded so far! I will check on the starvation aspect, however, I did notice while using systat -vm that there was no starvation on memory or anything else. That's why I was concerned as to why the machine halted/stalled. I'm turning off HTT now and will see how it performs. P. On Tuesday 26 August 2003 08:42 am, Michael Nottebrock wrote: > Paul Pathiakis wrote: > > It is my belief that a BSD DB is > > going to run faster on it's platform of choice for development (FreeBSD) > > than another OS. > > Why? I mean, seriously, what has the platform you run your gcc and vim on > to do with performance at the end of the day?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200308260919.28371.paul>