Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C50BA9FAE4E for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2006 10:00:40 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 02484-03 for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2006 13:00:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAAD89FA435 for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2006 10:00:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id d80so1810532pyd for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2006 06:00:33 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=MvCd/tuUy4yQPo09i6wwDuVttGWfu5RlyaMQ9b9QxvkZ2x7xibno+4ol7XQipF9eFvF5MIuHDCkiypIfvlPN90CcDGB9N/ep4F1EmXWzP/vsgs/Z55MM+qZbfbcRmH/P1+fR/mzukVOFQMuvLw2eSfWhE6hAd+nBCfBM9r7570Y= Received: by 10.65.234.2 with SMTP id l2mr1922028qbr; Sat, 23 Sep 2006 06:00:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.96.15 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Sep 2006 06:00:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 15:00:31 +0200 From: "Guido Neitzer" To: "mark@mark.mielke.cc" Subject: Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Cc: "Arjen van der Meijden" , "Vivek Khera" , "Pgsql-Performance ((((E-mail))))" In-Reply-To: <20060922223617.GA22923@mark.mielke.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4513A59E.3000807@valuecare.nl> <45145AB7.70004@tweakers.net> <20060922223617.GA22923@mark.mielke.cc> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.199 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, SPF_PASS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200609/317 X-Sequence-Number: 21003 I find the benchmark much more interesting in comparing PostgreSQL to MySQL than Intel to AMD. It might be as biased as other "benchmarks" but it shows clearly something that a lot of PostgreSQL user always thought: MySQL gives up on concurrency ... it just doesn't scale well. cug On 9/23/06, mark@mark.mielke.cc wrote: > Yep. From what I understand, Intel is 8 to 10 times the size of AMD. > > It's somewhat amazing that AMD even competes, and excellent for us, the > consumer, that they compete well, ensuring that we get very fast > computers, for amazingly low prices. > > But Intel isn't crashing down any time soon. Perhaps they became a little > lazy, and made a few mistakes. AMD is forcing them to clean up. > > May the competition continue... :-) > > Cheers, > mark -- PostgreSQL Bootcamp, Big Nerd Ranch Europe, Nov 2006 http://www.bignerdranch.com/news/2006-08-21.shtml