Dave Page wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: 23 November 2004 15:06 > > To: Dave Page > > Cc: Merlin Moncure; pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > PostgreSQL Win32 port list > > Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] scalability issues on win32 > > > > The general opinion of server users is that you need 2-4 more > > Win32 servers to do the same work as one Unix-like server. > > That and the difficulty of automated administration and > > security problems is what is preventing Win32 from making > > greater inroads into the server marketplace. > > > > Of course these are just generalizations. > > I'd rather avoid an OS advocacy war here, but if I'm honest, with group > policy and other tools such as SUS, I find that my Windows servers are > actually easier to administer than the Linux ones (I have about a 50-50 > mix at work). Perhaps that's because I favour Slackware though? > > As for the 2-4 servers quote, I find that a little on the high side. I > agree that generally you might expect a little more performance from an > equivalent Linux system on the same hardware, but in my practical > experience the difference is far less than you suggest. I have never run the tests myself. I am just quoting what I have heard, and maybe that information is a few years old. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
