You are either going to get a lot of replies or very few :) First off, lots of questions. Example: just because you have 2GB of RAM - did you allocate it to SAPDB? What about the hard drive configurations?
MySQL is known to be very fast and very simple. www.slashdot.org has several threads on this discussion (any database vs. MySQL). How did the concurrent test work? Did you have 10 programs do 1,000 inserts in a loop? Personally, I would not expect SAPDB to be faster than mySQL... "more powerful" != faster. I also find that the SAPDB network database drivers / protocols are not the greatest for small and frequent transactions... Have you tried running your test against localhost for both MySQL and SAPDB? You might find a dramatic difference between local server + client and over-network. Just my obvious feedback as another user. One could write books on a topic this complicated. Stephen -----Original Message----- From: XT Wang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 10:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: SAP DB vs MS SQL Performance Hi, We are moving database from MS SQL on PC server to Sun E450. The current database is MS SQL 2000 on a Single CPU Dell 1300 PC Server (550MHz PIII with 1GB Memory). E450 is 4 CPU (450MHz) with 2GB memory. We thought SAPDB should be more powerful than MS SQL. We did a simple test after installed the SAPDB64 on Solaris 2.8 (64bit). The result surprise us. We use three clients to concurrently insert 10,000 small record (64 bytes) into db. The average time is 37, 216ms on SAPDB on 4 CPU Sun Box. But MS SQL only used 18,764ms to do the insertion. The default setting ws used on both SAP DB and MS SQL. This picture is deadly wrong. There should be no way a 4 CPU Sun Box slower than PIII Intel box. Any suggestion what can cause it Thanks Dave Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! _______________________________________________ sapdb.general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://listserv.sap.com/mailman/listinfo/sapdb.general
