PostgreSQL on Linux PC vs MacOS X

[Jim Strickland]

We currently are running a data intensive web service on a Mac using 4D.
The developers of our site are looking at converting this web service to
PostgreSQL. We will have a backup of our three production servers at our
location. The developers are recommending that I purchase a 2GHz Dual
Processor G5 with between 2GB and 4 GB RAM. They say that this
configuration would be able to easily run a copy of all three production
servers. My question is: has anybody had any experience comparing the
performance of PostgreSQL on a G5 Mac versus a PC running Linux? Can
anyone tell me if there are any benefits of running PostgreSQL on one
platform over the other. Anything that can help me make the best
decision would be appreciated.

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

[Jeff Bohmer]

We use PostgreSQL 7.x on both OS X and Linux. We used to run OS X in
production, but due to numerous problems we switched to Linux. OS X
was not stable at all, especially under load. It was also a poor
performer under load or not.

In my tests, a P3/800, 512MB RAM (100MHz bus) was consistently faster
at all queries than a G4/1.25GHz, 1.5GB RAM (266MHz bus) for our
application. Both machines had single IDE drives.

Another thing to consider is that you can only get ATA drives with
Apple hardware. SCSI is not available from Apple, and SCSI devices
have very poor support under OS X. If a server with ATA drives goes
down at the wrong time, you can lose data. This happened to us with
our production OS X server last year. An extended power outage ran
out the UPS battery, the shutdown script did not stop the server in
time, and we had to restore from an earlier backup. For details on
why this can happen with ATA drives, see this thread:

<http://archives.postgr esql.org/pgsql-general/2003-10/msg01343.php>

Overall, PostgreSQL has been rock solid, very fast, and headache-free
on Linux. A complete change from OS X. Our main production
PostgreSQL server has been up for 234 days now. In that period, the
only downtime for PostgreSQL has been for planned upgrades.

As a side note, we've also had major problems running multi-threaded
servers on OS X which run great (stable and much, much faster) on
Linux.

- Jeff

We currently are running a data intensive web service on a Mac using
4D. The developers of our site are looking at converting this web
service to PostgreSQL. We will have a backup of our three production
servers at our location. The developers are recommending that I
purchase a 2GHz Dual Processor G5 with between 2GB and 4 GB RAM.
They say that this configuration would be able to easily run a copy
of all three production servers. My question is: has anybody had any
experience comparing the performance of PostgreSQL on a G5 Mac
versus a PC running Linux? Can anyone tell me if there are any
benefits of running PostgreSQL on one platform over the other.
Anything that can help me make the best decision would be
appreciated.

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

--

Jeff Bohmer
VisionLink, Inc.
_______________ _______________ ___
303.402.0170 x121
http://www.visionlink.org/
_______________ _______________ ___
People. Tools. Change. Community.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html

[Jeff Bohmer]

We use PostgreSQL 7.x on both OS X and Linux. We used to run OS X in
production, but due to numerous problems we switched to Linux. OS X
was not stable at all, especially under load. It was also a poor
performer under load or not.

In my tests, a P3/800, 512MB RAM (100MHz bus) was consistently faster
at all queries than a G4/1.25GHz, 1.5GB RAM (266MHz bus) for our
application. Both machines had single IDE drives.

Another thing to consider is that you can only get ATA drives with
Apple hardware. SCSI is not available from Apple, and SCSI devices
have very poor support under OS X. If a server with ATA drives goes
down at the wrong time, you can lose data. This happened to us with
our production OS X server last year. An extended power outage ran
out the UPS battery, the shutdown script did not stop the server in
time, and we had to restore from an earlier backup. For details on
why this can happen with ATA drives, see this thread:

<http://archives.postgr esql.org/pgsql-general/2003-10/msg01343.php>

Overall, PostgreSQL has been rock solid, very fast, and headache-free
on Linux. A complete change from OS X. Our main production
PostgreSQL server has been up for 234 days now. In that period, the
only downtime for PostgreSQL has been for planned upgrades.

As a side note, we've also had major problems running multi-threaded
servers on OS X which run great (stable and much, much faster) on
Linux.

- Jeff

We currently are running a data intensive web service on a Mac using
4D. The developers of our site are looking at converting this web
service to PostgreSQL. We will have a backup of our three production
servers at our location. The developers are recommending that I
purchase a 2GHz Dual Processor G5 with between 2GB and 4 GB RAM.
They say that this configuration would be able to easily run a copy
of all three production servers. My question is: has anybody had any
experience comparing the performance of PostgreSQL on a G5 Mac
versus a PC running Linux? Can anyone tell me if there are any
benefits of running PostgreSQL on one platform over the other.
Anything that can help me make the best decision would be
appreciated.

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

--

Jeff Bohmer
VisionLink, Inc.
_______________ _______________ ___
303.402.0170 x121
http://www.visionlink.org/
_______________ _______________ ___
People. Tools. Change. Community.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html

[Jim Strickland]

I noticed you ran PostgreSQL on a G4. What version of OS X were you
running? Is it possible the issues you were facing were fixed with the
newer G5 processor?

Jeff Bohmer wrote:

We use PostgreSQL 7.x on both OS X and Linux. We used to run OS X in
production, but due to numerous problems we switched to Linux. OS X
was not stable at all, especially under load. It was also a poor
performer under load or not.

In my tests, a P3/800, 512MB RAM (100MHz bus) was consistently faster
at all queries than a G4/1.25GHz, 1.5GB RAM (266MHz bus) for our
application. Both machines had single IDE drives.

Another thing to consider is that you can only get ATA drives with
Apple hardware. SCSI is not available from Apple, and SCSI devices
have very poor support under OS X. If a server with ATA drives goes
down at the wrong time, you can lose data. This happened to us with
our production OS X server last year. An extended power outage ran
out the UPS battery, the shutdown script did not stop the server in
time, and we had to restore from an earlier backup. For details on
why this can happen with ATA drives, see this thread:

<http://archives.postgr esql.org/pgsql-general/2003-10/msg01343.php>

Overall, PostgreSQL has been rock solid, very fast, and headache-free
on Linux. A complete change from OS X. Our main production
PostgreSQL server has been up for 234 days now. In that period, the
only downtime for PostgreSQL has been for planned upgrades.

As a side note, we've also had major problems running multi-threaded
servers on OS X which run great (stable and much, much faster) on Linux.

- Jeff

We currently are running a data intensive web service on a Mac using
4D. The developers of our site are looking at converting this web
service to PostgreSQL. We will have a backup of our three production
servers at our location. The developers are recommending that I
purchase a 2GHz Dual Processor G5 with between 2GB and 4 GB RAM. They
say that this configuration would be able to easily run a copy of all
three production servers. My question is: has anybody had any
experience comparing the performance of PostgreSQL on a G5 Mac versus
a PC running Linux? Can anyone tell me if there are any benefits of
running PostgreSQL on one platform over the other. Anything that can
help me make the best decision would be appreciated.

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

[Jim Strickland]

I noticed you ran PostgreSQL on a G4. What version of OS X were you
running? Is it possible the issues you were facing were fixed with the
newer G5 processor?

Jeff Bohmer wrote:

We use PostgreSQL 7.x on both OS X and Linux. We used to run OS X in
production, but due to numerous problems we switched to Linux. OS X
was not stable at all, especially under load. It was also a poor
performer under load or not.

In my tests, a P3/800, 512MB RAM (100MHz bus) was consistently faster
at all queries than a G4/1.25GHz, 1.5GB RAM (266MHz bus) for our
application. Both machines had single IDE drives.

Another thing to consider is that you can only get ATA drives with
Apple hardware. SCSI is not available from Apple, and SCSI devices
have very poor support under OS X. If a server with ATA drives goes
down at the wrong time, you can lose data. This happened to us with
our production OS X server last year. An extended power outage ran
out the UPS battery, the shutdown script did not stop the server in
time, and we had to restore from an earlier backup. For details on
why this can happen with ATA drives, see this thread:

<http://archives.postgr esql.org/pgsql-general/2003-10/msg01343.php>

Overall, PostgreSQL has been rock solid, very fast, and headache-free
on Linux. A complete change from OS X. Our main production
PostgreSQL server has been up for 234 days now. In that period, the
only downtime for PostgreSQL has been for planned upgrades.

As a side note, we've also had major problems running multi-threaded
servers on OS X which run great (stable and much, much faster) on Linux.

- Jeff

We currently are running a data intensive web service on a Mac using
4D. The developers of our site are looking at converting this web
service to PostgreSQL. We will have a backup of our three production
servers at our location. The developers are recommending that I
purchase a 2GHz Dual Processor G5 with between 2GB and 4 GB RAM. They
say that this configuration would be able to easily run a copy of all
three production servers. My question is: has anybody had any
experience comparing the performance of PostgreSQL on a G5 Mac versus
a PC running Linux? Can anyone tell me if there are any benefits of
running PostgreSQL on one platform over the other. Anything that can
help me make the best decision would be appreciated.

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

[Jeff Bohmer]

>I noticed you ran PostgreSQL on a G4. What version of OS X were you

running? Is it possible the issues you were facing were fixed with
the newer G5 processor?
We were using OS X 10.2 in production. We currently use 10.3 for our
development machines.

I would be shocked if a processor could fix stability issues in an
operating system. As for performance, I cannot say how much better
PostgreSQL runs on a G5 as we don't have any G5s. In terms of
hardware specs, a G4/1.25Ghz should blow away a P3/800. But it
didn't for us, and I think that is because Linux/x86 is much more
efficient than OS X/ppc. I do not expect that to change with a newer
ppc processor.

Since your your developers believe a dual G5 to be plenty, you will
probably get more than enough performance from an XServe G5 and any
comparable 2-way Intel or AMD x86 system. PostgreSQL should handily
outperform 4D. If those systems are in your price range, and
stability isn't a big concern, you should probably go with the OS you
are more familiar with.

- Jeff

Jeff Bohmer wrote:

We use PostgreSQL 7.x on both OS X and Linux. We used to run OS X
in production, but due to numerous problems we switched to Linux.
OS X was not stable at all, especially under load. It was also a
poor performer under load or not.

In my tests, a P3/800, 512MB RAM (100MHz bus) was consistently
faster at all queries than a G4/1.25GHz, 1.5GB RAM (266MHz bus) for
our application. Both machines had single IDE drives.

Another thing to consider is that you can only get ATA drives with
Apple hardware. SCSI is not available from Apple, and SCSI devices
have very poor support under OS X. If a server with ATA drives
goes down at the wrong time, you can lose data. This happened to
us with our production OS X server last year. An extended power
outage ran out the UPS battery, the shutdown script did not stop
the server in time, and we had to restore from an earlier backup.
For details on why this can happen with ATA drives, see this thread:

<http://archives.postgr esql.org/pgsql-general/2003-10/msg01343.php>

Overall, PostgreSQL has been rock solid, very fast, and
headache-free on Linux. A complete change from OS X. Our main
production PostgreSQL server has been up for 234 days now. In that
period, the only downtime for PostgreSQL has been for planned
upgrades.

As a side note, we've also had major problems running
multi-threaded servers on OS X which run great (stable and much,
much faster) on Linux.

- Jeff

We currently are running a data intensive web service on a Mac
using 4D. The developers of our site are looking at converting
this web service to PostgreSQL. We will have a backup of our three
production servers at our location. The developers are
recommendi ng that I purchase a 2GHz Dual Processor G5 with between
2GB and 4 GB RAM. They say that this configuration would be able
to easily run a copy of all three production servers. My question
is: has anybody had any experience comparing the performance of
PostgreSQL on a G5 Mac versus a PC running Linux? Can anyone tell
me if there are any benefits of running PostgreSQL on one platform
over the other. Anything that can help me make the best decision
would be appreciated.

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

--

Jeff Bohmer
VisionLink, Inc.
_______________ _______________ ___
303.402.0170 x121
http://www.visionlink.org/
_______________ _______________ ___
People. Tools. Change. Community.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to ma*******@postg resql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

[Jeff Bohmer]

>I noticed you ran PostgreSQL on a G4. What version of OS X were you

running? Is it possible the issues you were facing were fixed with
the newer G5 processor?
We were using OS X 10.2 in production. We currently use 10.3 for our
development machines.

I would be shocked if a processor could fix stability issues in an
operating system. As for performance, I cannot say how much better
PostgreSQL runs on a G5 as we don't have any G5s. In terms of
hardware specs, a G4/1.25Ghz should blow away a P3/800. But it
didn't for us, and I think that is because Linux/x86 is much more
efficient than OS X/ppc. I do not expect that to change with a newer
ppc processor.

Since your your developers believe a dual G5 to be plenty, you will
probably get more than enough performance from an XServe G5 and any
comparable 2-way Intel or AMD x86 system. PostgreSQL should handily
outperform 4D. If those systems are in your price range, and
stability isn't a big concern, you should probably go with the OS you
are more familiar with.

- Jeff

Jeff Bohmer wrote:

We use PostgreSQL 7.x on both OS X and Linux. We used to run OS X
in production, but due to numerous problems we switched to Linux.
OS X was not stable at all, especially under load. It was also a
poor performer under load or not.

In my tests, a P3/800, 512MB RAM (100MHz bus) was consistently
faster at all queries than a G4/1.25GHz, 1.5GB RAM (266MHz bus) for
our application. Both machines had single IDE drives.

Another thing to consider is that you can only get ATA drives with
Apple hardware. SCSI is not available from Apple, and SCSI devices
have very poor support under OS X. If a server with ATA drives
goes down at the wrong time, you can lose data. This happened to
us with our production OS X server last year. An extended power
outage ran out the UPS battery, the shutdown script did not stop
the server in time, and we had to restore from an earlier backup.
For details on why this can happen with ATA drives, see this thread:

<http://archives.postgr esql.org/pgsql-general/2003-10/msg01343.php>

Overall, PostgreSQL has been rock solid, very fast, and
headache-free on Linux. A complete change from OS X. Our main
production PostgreSQL server has been up for 234 days now. In that
period, the only downtime for PostgreSQL has been for planned
upgrades.

As a side note, we've also had major problems running
multi-threaded servers on OS X which run great (stable and much,
much faster) on Linux.

- Jeff

We currently are running a data intensive web service on a Mac
using 4D. The developers of our site are looking at converting
this web service to PostgreSQL. We will have a backup of our three
production servers at our location. The developers are
recommendi ng that I purchase a 2GHz Dual Processor G5 with between
2GB and 4 GB RAM. They say that this configuration would be able
to easily run a copy of all three production servers. My question
is: has anybody had any experience comparing the performance of
PostgreSQL on a G5 Mac versus a PC running Linux? Can anyone tell
me if there are any benefits of running PostgreSQL on one platform
over the other. Anything that can help me make the best decision
would be appreciated.

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

--

Jeff Bohmer
VisionLink, Inc.
_______________ _______________ ___
303.402.0170 x121
http://www.visionlink.org/
_______________ _______________ ___
People. Tools. Change. Community.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to ma*******@postg resql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

[Jim Strickland]

Well, the whole reason I have asked this question is because my
developer swears by OS X and PostgreSQL. However, I wanted opinions from
other people who have possibly used a similar setup so I can make an
informed decision. I will certainly keep your advice in mind. I guess
the only reason I was asking about the version of OS X and the G5
processor, is because that is all my developer uses and he seems to
think they make a great combination, but that seems to be at odds with
your experience.

Perhaps some others will weigh in with their experiences and I will be
able to make a sound decision. Fortunately there is no great rush to
decide. Thanks for your help.

Jeff Bohmer wrote:

I noticed you ran PostgreSQL on a G4. What version of OS X were you
running? Is it possible the issues you were facing were fixed with
the newer G5 processor?

We were using OS X 10.2 in production. We currently use 10.3 for our
development machines.

I would be shocked if a processor could fix stability issues in an
operating system. As for performance, I cannot say how much better
PostgreSQL runs on a G5 as we don't have any G5s. In terms of
hardware specs, a G4/1.25Ghz should blow away a P3/800. But it didn't
for us, and I think that is because Linux/x86 is much more efficient
than OS X/ppc. I do not expect that to change with a newer ppc
processor.

Since your your developers believe a dual G5 to be plenty, you will
probably get more than enough performance from an XServe G5 and any
comparable 2-way Intel or AMD x86 system. PostgreSQL should handily
outperform 4D. If those systems are in your price range, and
stability isn't a big concern, you should probably go with the OS you
are more familiar with.

- Jeff

Jeff Bohmer wrote:

We use PostgreSQL 7.x on both OS X and Linux. We used to run OS X
in production, but due to numerous problems we switched to Linux. OS
X was not stable at all, especially under load. It was also a poor
performer under load or not.

In my tests, a P3/800, 512MB RAM (100MHz bus) was consistently
faster at all queries than a G4/1.25GHz, 1.5GB RAM (266MHz bus) for
our application. Both machines had single IDE drives.

Another thing to consider is that you can only get ATA drives with
Apple hardware. SCSI is not available from Apple, and SCSI devices
have very poor support under OS X. If a server with ATA drives goes
down at the wrong time, you can lose data. This happened to us with
our production OS X server last year. An extended power outage ran
out the UPS battery, the shutdown script did not stop the server in
time, and we had to restore from an earlier backup. For details on
why this can happen with ATA drives, see this thread:

<http://archives.postgr esql.org/pgsql-general/2003-10/msg01343.php>

Overall, PostgreSQL has been rock solid, very fast, and
headache-free on Linux. A complete change from OS X. Our main
production PostgreSQL server has been up for 234 days now. In that
period, the only downtime for PostgreSQL has been for planned upgrades.

As a side note, we've also had major problems running multi-threaded
servers on OS X which run great (stable and much, much faster) on
Linux.

- Jeff
We currently are running a data intensive web service on a Mac
using 4D. The developers of our site are looking at converting this
web service to PostgreSQL. We will have a backup of our three
production servers at our location. The developers are recommending
that I purchase a 2GHz Dual Processor G5 with between 2GB and 4 GB
RAM. They say that this configuration would be able to easily run a
copy of all three production servers. My question is: has anybody
had any experience comparing the performance of PostgreSQL on a G5
Mac versus a PC running Linux? Can anyone tell me if there are any
benefits of running PostgreSQL on one platform over the other.
Anything that can help me make the best decision would be appreciated.

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of
broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to ma*******@postg resql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

[Jim Strickland]

Well, the whole reason I have asked this question is because my
developer swears by OS X and PostgreSQL. However, I wanted opinions from
other people who have possibly used a similar setup so I can make an
informed decision. I will certainly keep your advice in mind. I guess
the only reason I was asking about the version of OS X and the G5
processor, is because that is all my developer uses and he seems to
think they make a great combination, but that seems to be at odds with
your experience.

Perhaps some others will weigh in with their experiences and I will be
able to make a sound decision. Fortunately there is no great rush to
decide. Thanks for your help.

Jeff Bohmer wrote:

I noticed you ran PostgreSQL on a G4. What version of OS X were you
running? Is it possible the issues you were facing were fixed with
the newer G5 processor?

We were using OS X 10.2 in production. We currently use 10.3 for our
development machines.

I would be shocked if a processor could fix stability issues in an
operating system. As for performance, I cannot say how much better
PostgreSQL runs on a G5 as we don't have any G5s. In terms of
hardware specs, a G4/1.25Ghz should blow away a P3/800. But it didn't
for us, and I think that is because Linux/x86 is much more efficient
than OS X/ppc. I do not expect that to change with a newer ppc
processor.

Since your your developers believe a dual G5 to be plenty, you will
probably get more than enough performance from an XServe G5 and any
comparable 2-way Intel or AMD x86 system. PostgreSQL should handily
outperform 4D. If those systems are in your price range, and
stability isn't a big concern, you should probably go with the OS you
are more familiar with.

- Jeff

Jeff Bohmer wrote:

We use PostgreSQL 7.x on both OS X and Linux. We used to run OS X
in production, but due to numerous problems we switched to Linux. OS
X was not stable at all, especially under load. It was also a poor
performer under load or not.

In my tests, a P3/800, 512MB RAM (100MHz bus) was consistently
faster at all queries than a G4/1.25GHz, 1.5GB RAM (266MHz bus) for
our application. Both machines had single IDE drives.

Another thing to consider is that you can only get ATA drives with
Apple hardware. SCSI is not available from Apple, and SCSI devices
have very poor support under OS X. If a server with ATA drives goes
down at the wrong time, you can lose data. This happened to us with
our production OS X server last year. An extended power outage ran
out the UPS battery, the shutdown script did not stop the server in
time, and we had to restore from an earlier backup. For details on
why this can happen with ATA drives, see this thread:

<http://archives.postgr esql.org/pgsql-general/2003-10/msg01343.php>

Overall, PostgreSQL has been rock solid, very fast, and
headache-free on Linux. A complete change from OS X. Our main
production PostgreSQL server has been up for 234 days now. In that
period, the only downtime for PostgreSQL has been for planned upgrades.

As a side note, we've also had major problems running multi-threaded
servers on OS X which run great (stable and much, much faster) on
Linux.

- Jeff
We currently are running a data intensive web service on a Mac
using 4D. The developers of our site are looking at converting this
web service to PostgreSQL. We will have a backup of our three
production servers at our location. The developers are recommending
that I purchase a 2GHz Dual Processor G5 with between 2GB and 4 GB
RAM. They say that this configuration would be able to easily run a
copy of all three production servers. My question is: has anybody
had any experience comparing the performance of PostgreSQL on a G5
Mac versus a PC running Linux? Can anyone tell me if there are any
benefits of running PostgreSQL on one platform over the other.
Anything that can help me make the best decision would be appreciated.

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of
broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

--
James Strickland - MCP
IT Manager
American Roamer
901-377-8585
http://www.americanroamer.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to ma*******@postg resql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

[Kevin Murphy]

On Nov 3, 2004, at 1:33 PM, Jeff Bohmer wrote:

We use PostgreSQL 7.x on both OS X and Linux. We used to run OS X in
production, but due to numerous problems we switched to Linux. OS X
was not stable at all, especially under load. It was also a poor
performer under load or not.

Did you (or anyone) ever compare performance of PostgreSQL under PPC
Linux running on the G4 or G5?

-Kevin Murphy
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to ma*******@postg resql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly