From: Derick H Siddoway
Date: March 19 1999 8:45pm
Subject: Re: fastCPU vs moreRAM
List-Archive: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/638
Message-Id: <0A60436F2B74C222*/c=us/admd=attmail/prmd=amex/o=unresolved/ou=HUB1/ou=AMEX/s=Siddoway/g=Derick/i=H/@MHS>

Oops.  My memory of this is certainly faulty then...
But it was a 386-class machine with a lot of memory (heck, it
may have been 16M, now that I'm doubting my memory) that beat
out a Pentium-class machine with nearly no memory.




From:	kpielorz%tdx.co.uk@Internet on 03/19/99 09:49 AM
To:	Derick H Siddoway/TC/TRS/American Express@AMEX
cc:	scottm%phoenix.net@Internet, mysql%lists.mysql.com@Internet 
Subject:	Re: fastCPU vs moreRAM


Derick H Siddoway wrote:

> As an extreme case, a couple of years ago I ran some informal
> tests on a 386sx with 128MB of RAM versus a pentium200 with 8MB
> of RAM, and the 386 won almost every time.

You sure that was a 386sx? - They only had 24 bit address busses = 2^24 = 16Mb
of RAM max... :-(

I still agree though - with most Databases more RAM = better... Most O/S's
(and even Mysql) provide performance monitors for watching what the machines
processes are doing (i.e. excessive swapping, disk access etc.)

-Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To request this thread, e-mail mysql-thread619@stripped
To unsubscribe, e-mail the address shown in the
List-Unsubscribe header of this message.
For additional commands, e-mail: mysql-help@stripped