Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 203749FA5BC for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:19:35 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28594-07 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:18:41 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from tomts43-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts43.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.110]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B76359FA57A for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:18:42 -0300 (ADT) Received: from serenity ([70.52.64.62]) by tomts43-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20070906231835.MJCO26794.tomts43-srv.bellnexxia.net@serenity>; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 19:18:35 -0400 From: "Carlo Stonebanks" To: "'James Mansion'" Cc: "'Scott Marlowe'" , "'Alvaro Herrera'" , References: <20070904230639.GA23731@alvh.no-ip.org> <3DCCF196F82444998B33F40C97B71CA4@serenity> <46E0657E.30401@mansionfamily.plus.com> <9383B56B23C14CD0B66340EE36C952F9@serenity> <46E0692F.6020309@mansionfamily.plus.com> In-Reply-To: <46E0692F.6020309@mansionfamily.plus.com> Subject: Re: Performance on 8CPU's and 32GB of RAM Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 19:18:40 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcfwyC4LbHUVyatLRxeFO7/slZ6o4QAB9+Jw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16480 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.001 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=BAYES_50=0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200709/105 X-Sequence-Number: 26650 Wow - it's nice to hear someone say that... out loud. Thanks, you gave me hope! -----Original Message----- From: James Mansion [mailto:james@mansionfamily.plus.com] Sent: September 6, 2007 4:55 PM To: Carlo Stonebanks Cc: Scott Marlowe; Alvaro Herrera; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Performance on 8CPU's and 32GB of RAM Carlo Stonebanks wrote: > Isn't it just easier to assume that Windows Server can't do anything right? > ;-) > > Well, avoiding the ;-) - people do, and its remarkably foolish of them. Its a long-standing whinge that many people with a UNIX-background seem to just assume that Windows sucks, but you could run 40,000 sockets from a single Win32 process for a while and some well-known UNIX systems would still struggle to do this, libevent or no. Admitedly, the way a Win32 app is architected would be rather different from a typical POSIX one. Windows has been a cheap target bt its remarkably adequate and the TPC results speak for themselves.