Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 11:57:13AM -0400, Jignesh K. Shah wrote:
>>> I think this result will be useful for performance discussions of
>>> postgresql against other databases.
>>>
>>> http://www.spec.org/jAppServer2004/results/res2007q3/
>>
>> Am I right if this is for a T2000 (Niagara) database server? It sure is
>> interesting, but I can't help thinking it's not a very common
>> configuration...
>
> I have yet to see a benchmark that was valid on a common configuration.
> Common configurations don't make people in suits go... "oooohhhh sexy!".
> It is also the reason that those in the know typically ignore all
> benchmarks and do their own testing.
This kind of benchmarks are primarily a marketing thing. And as such,
it's a very good one to have, because there are certainly a large
amounts of PHBs who will just dispose a solution that's not "proven" (we
all know what that means, but they don't) without even looking at the
details.
>From a *technical* perspective it doesn't mean anything that you can
apply directly to your application. All it says is "yes, you can make it
fast enough".
But again, as a marketing thing, it's great.
//Magnus
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
