I forgot to say that that the differences in times are in the isc_dsql_prep=
are() function.
All tests were done on local databases (no inetd).

Thank you.

--- In ib-support@y..., cuncua1@y... wrote:
> Yes, the machine was the same, and both Linux (RH6.2) and FreeBSD (4.3) w=
er=
> e optimized (hdparm and sysctl).
> The test was a very simple one using the C api (some selects on an small =
da=
> tabase) and I dont remember exactly the number but was something like 1.2=
se=
> conds in Freebsd and 0.8 seconds in Linux.
> I dont pretend to do serious benchmarking, but the differences were notor=
io=
> us.
> My previous experiences in other DBMs (postgresql and mysql) showed diffe=
re=
> nt results (being FreeBSD faster than Linux), so it was disturbing.
> In fact, in this small computer almost anything runs faster in FreeBSD bu=
t =
> Firebird.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> --- In ib-support@y..., Paul Reeves <paul@f...> wrote:
> > cuncua1@y... wrote:
> > >
> > > I tested firebir both in linux and freebsd (my platform of choice), b=
ut=
> I w=
> > >
> > > as very dissapointed with the differences in performance.
> > > Why is FreeBSD ( included the november 20 build in FBSD 4.3) so much =
sl=
> ower=
> > >
> > > compared with the classic server in Linux ?.
> > > I am switching to postgresql because of this, and it´s a shame becaus=
e =
> I li=
> > >
> > > ke the way firebird/interbase works.
> > >
> >
> > You've tested this on a dual boot machine, of course? And the disc
> > configuration is the same (ie, you've twiddled/not twiddled with hdparm=
a=
> nd
> > the bsd equivalent on each platform)?
> >
> > What tests did you run to compare performance? How much slower was the =
Fr=
> eeBSD
> > version?
> >
> >
> > Paul
> > --
> >
> > Paul Reeves
> > http://www.ibphoenix.com
> > taking InterBase further