List:MySQL on Win32« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Peter Carter Date:July 28 1999 8:35pm
Subject:Re: Win32 MySQL vs. Linux MySQL
View as plain text  
At 03:15 PM 7/28/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Peter,
>
>Nice analysis, Peter. A few things, though:
>> 1) MySQL does not require a super-fast file system. The application
>cache's
>> the data quite well. Drive IO is not a big factor in choosing a platform.
>
>I disagree. I'm running a database with 8 million records. We're seeing
>somewhere between 5% and 10% CPU utilization on inserts, becuase of drive IO
>issues.
>

My thought on this was more along the lines of comparing file system pigs
like oracle etc... But on large scale operations I will give you this one ;)


>
>> Linux's strength is a super fast drive system. NT's strength is a
>> transaction-based file system (NTFS), which means it can be recovered
>> (rolled back). Since speed is not an issue, I would have a preference for
>> the latter.
>
>Having lost considerably more data on NTFS than on Unix filesystems, I think
>that your preference is misplaced.
>

Point taken.


---
Peter B. Carter (peterc@stripped)
Pager: 613-751-4660
http://www.pbc.ottawa.on.ca

Thread
Win32 MySQL vs. Linux MySQLRobert B├╝tof27 Jul
Re: Win32 MySQL vs. Linux MySQLChristopher R. Jones28 Jul
  • Re: Win32 MySQL vs. Linux MySQLSimson L. Garfinkel28 Jul
    • Re: Win32 MySQL vs. Linux MySQLPeter Carter28 Jul
  • Re: Win32 MySQL vs. Linux MySQLSimson L. Garfinkel28 Jul
    • Re: Win32 MySQL vs. Linux MySQLPeter Carter29 Jul
      • Re: Win32 MySQL vs. Linux MySQLMichael Widenius2 Aug