Eric,
> I am sure all FreeBSD users are sick and tired of saying this. USE > 4.10!!!! > Lots of people blindly follow version numbers but 5.x is a lot different > than 4.x in ways I don't yet feel comfortable with using on production > machines. Only one of those issues is with benchmark numbers, but that > is certainly one of them. If you don't feel comfortable with 5_branch on production, that's fine, I respect your choice. On the other hand, we have lots of official documentation saying that LinuxThreads, threading, memory handling, disk access is improved in 5_branch (compared to 4). I'm looking for an OS that can handle my database. OpenBSD -- which, I just proved by a test machine -- performs better than FreeBSD. That's why I can't even imagine how poorly FreeBSD 4.10 (which has just been released) would handle my database. I'm not looking for the cutting edge OS. I'm not trying to find one that performs .1ms better than the other. I just want a OS that handle my database on a decent i386 machine -- and yes, I would be glad to give AMD64 a try, as long as someone tells me that it will be able to handle my load (50 concurrent connections, 6GB database, increasing by 1 million rows/month). Heck, if it was up to me, I would still be using Linux 0.99q on 386SX. Take care, RV Tec PS: There's no need to CC my address. I'm subscribed to the list. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
