On the topic of Windows versus Linux. a While ago we did extensive speed
testing between the two operating systems. and came to the following
conclusion. With Firebird 1.0.x Linux is devenatly mush faster than
Windows. With 1.5.x the diverence is mush less, but Linux is still
faster. It do depend a lot on the filesystem that you use on linux and
also if you use hyperthreading or not.

I sugest that you take the time to evaluate the diverent solutions
available because What we concluded may not the the same result with
your tests. And it will differ from scenario to scenario.

In out test case we have lots of Stored procedures and very little
execution by the EXE's and we found that The fastest Linux execution we
could get On a Huge process was 3.5 Hours This was with XFS as the file
system on a quad processor box.
With windows on the same box the fastest we could get it was 4 Hours.
keeping in mind that we hade to get a spesial version of windows server
to allow us to make use of all 4 processors.

On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 05:01, Alan McDonald wrote:
> >
> > Are there any noticable differences in performance between firebird on
> > the windows and linux out of the box?
>
> Out of the box, you are better advised to run WinOS with Forced Writes ON.
> This will lower performance a tiny tad.
> Also it's argued theory that since Linux is not running a GUI then more CPU
> cycles are available to server processes.
> That said - I have servers on both environments and I'd have to do some
> pretty long running test to see the difference and when you ignore thory and
> put a reall application against it - conclusion would be "it depends"
> I'd recommend going with your gut and your personal preference.
>
> > Also does it make much difference when making the decision between super
> > server and classic archictectures on linux with nptl or linux threads?
> >
>
> I think you need a lot more RAM to run Classic effectively. Classic has
> never been touted as the final thing for Windows, it's more a Linux build as
> far as I know.
> But classic I think is supposed to cater for greater concurrent users that
> superserver.
> I'm sure there are other ready to comment further on this
> Alan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>