Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon

From: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
To: "Christopher Browne" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon
Date: 2005-04-25 13:52:16
Message-ID: 6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3415C266F@Herge.rcsinc.local (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
> In practice, we have watched Windows evolve in such a fashion with
> respect to multiuser support, and, in effect, it has never really
> gotten it.  Microsoft started by hacking something on top of MS-DOS,
> and by the time enough applications had enough dependancies on the way
> that worked, it has essentially become impossible for them to migrate
> properly to a multiuser model since applications are normally designed
> with the myopic "this is MY computer!" model of the world.

Completely false.  NT was a complete rewrite (1993ish) and was
inherently multi-user with even the GDI running as a user level process
(no longer however).  The NT kernel was scalable and portable, running
on the Alpha, MIPS, etc.

However, you do have a point with applications...many win32 developers
have a very bad habit about expecting their apps to install and run as
root.  However, this is generally not a problem with Microsoft stuff.
In short, the problem is really people, not the technology.

Merlin

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Joel FradkinDate: 2005-04-25 14:07:39
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon
Previous:From: Joel FradkinDate: 2005-04-25 13:08:52
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Joel's Performance Issues WAS : Opteron vs Xeon

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group