| From: | Ned Lilly <ned(at)greatbridge(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | "'PostgreSQL General'" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Great Bridge benchmark results for Postgres, 4 others |
| Date: | 2000-08-15 22:58:50 |
| Message-ID: | 3999CB2A.D77425D7@greatbridge.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Ross J. Reedstrom" wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 12:21:25PM -0400, Ned Lilly wrote:
> > Oh, Dan, I'm not that clever... ;-)
> >
> > But I *can* tell you that the market leading proprietary RDBMS products we
> > tested were not IBM, Informix, or Sybase.
> >
>
> And in reply to the MySQL version comment/question, Ned said:
> "We only used the released versions of each database."
>
> I took that to mean they used the latest released version of each
> database. One thing I couldn't deduce: which operating system where the
> commercial RDBMs run on top of? NT for one of them, for sure, but the
> other can probably run on either of the quoted OSs. If it was run on NT,
> we might be seeing the linux vs. NT effect.
One of them ran on NT, the other four ran on Red Hat Linux 6.1.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ned Lilly | 2000-08-15 23:26:47 | Re: Open Source Database Routs Competition in New BenchmarkTests |
| Previous Message | mjp | 2000-08-15 22:08:50 | Re: bytea question |