Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 09:38:17 +0400 From: "Andrew P." <infofarmer@mail.ru> To: infofarmer@mail.ru Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: About FreeBSD and Solaris Message-ID: <424E2FC9.3030401@mail.ru> In-Reply-To: <424E2F5B.7090006@mail.ru> References: <20050326224344.4152110C83@relay2.beelinegprs.ru> <20050326233120.GA4611@gothmog.gr> <20050327124610.GA1609@carbon.redbrick.dcu.ie> <ff0f76e00503270915280b6852@mail.gmail.com> <86oed2veqd.fsf@xps.des.no> <424B04CC.8060909@mail.ru> <ff0f76e00503310547236a8b08@mail.gmail.com> <424E2F5B.7090006@mail.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andrew P. wrote: > Phil Brennan wrote: > >> On Mar 30, 2005 8:58 PM, Andrew P. <infofarmer@mail.ru> wrote: >> >>> Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: >>> >>>> Phil Brennan <phil.brennan@gmail.com> writes: >>>> >>>> >>>>> This mysql benchmark includes solaris 10 and freebsd 5.3. Its a month >>>>> or two old now, but its the only one I've seen. Dag-Erling, how does >>>>> this show solaris to be slow on x86? It certainly isn't slow compared >>>>> to freebsd. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Please use something else than MySQL as benchmark, as MySQL has >>>> well-known issues with FreeBSD's threading model. >>>> >>>> DES >>> >>> >>> Latest talk on the Net suggests that freebsd is a >>> perfect choice for mysql-based database, but you >>> should compile it (mysql) with linux threads enabled. >>> >>> I think Yahoo has used mysql on freebsd for years >>> on end. They have switched their core db units to >>> linux-oracle, though. >>> >>> Andrew P. >>> >> >> Could you provide urls for this latest talk? From the testing in that >> benchmark that I posted, kse threading seems >> to be as good as linuxthreads, but not enough to catch linux or >> solaris. >> > What part of it? Yahoo using mysql was in some > mySQL manual, Yahoo using freebsd was everywhere, > Yahoo switching to oracle was in the news couple > of months ago, Yahoo switching to linux was also > in the news - and it was explained by linux being > a supported platform for oracle, while freebsd > being not, and linuxthreads being greater for > mysql/freebsd was in that excerpt by a prominent > mysql evangelist. > > Googling for the very last, I only found this: > http://software.newsforge.com/software/04/12/27/1243207.shtml > > quoting: > > FreeBSD 5.3 did relatively well in both KSE and linuxthreads mode, > although with all the work that's been done in the SMP and threading > realms, I was a little disappointed with the results. Still, it seems > that the native threading model for the production release of FreeBSD-5 > is ready for prime time, and can replace the long-standing FreeBSD > convention of using linuxthreads with MySQL. > > For FreeBSD 4.11, however, linuxthreads definitely helped with > performance (and in many cases outperformed FreeBSD 5.3). With libc_r, > performance lagged far behind linuxthreads for many tests, and there was > little scalability. I would say it's highly advisable to build your > FreeBSD 4.11 MySQL binary with linuxthreads. Erm, I've just noticed that it's the one you posted earlier, it's also one of the most popular mysql benchmarking articles there is now :-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?424E2FC9.3030401>