Leland, > If I understand the article correctly, TPF was targeted for IBM's > zSeries mainframes, which runs on IBM's OS only. That's likely where > the 25,000 transaction per seconds originated.
Mainframe TPF is it's own OS, but can run under VM. Looks like it's been re-worked to run on Linux. > The new z/TPF > will run on regular servers under Linux and other OS(s). For JOY! It is interesting for apps with really high performance requirements. > DB2 is better know as IBM's database, but having z/TPF come out as an > open source product is great. Is it free? One advantages of running > PostgreSQL is it's free. No, not free, and likely not cheap. I believe they promote it as being low cost per transaction. > I remember downloading a 30 day test version of DB2 to RadHat > Linux 4 or 5, so DB2 has been around on Linux for a long time, but you > may have to pay big time, depending on use, if you opt for a license. > I'm posting this email as I run out the door to take care of an errand. > Be back soon. There are advantages going with IBM (no more "out with the old, in with the new"!), but cost isn't one of them. I just thought to mention TPF for perspective. Might come in handy for someone involved with that kind of application. Bill > > Regards, > > LelandJ > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com > >> [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Leland Jackson > >> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 12:31 PM > >> To: profoxt...@leafe.com > >> Subject: [NF] Postgres vs. SQL Server > >> > >> > >> Results of test performed between MSSQL and PostgreSQL: > >> > >> #------------------------------- > >> Excerpt: > >> > >> 5 Conclusions > >> This paper compares the performance and scaling of the BenchmarkSQL > >> workload running > >> on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.4 with that of the same workload on > >> Windows Server 2008 R2 > >> Enterprise. The database servers used were HP ProLiant DL370 > >> G6 servers > >> equipped with > >> 48 GB of RAM and comprised of dual sockets, each with a > 3.2 GHz Intel > >> Xeon W5580 > >> Nehalem processor (totaling 8 cores). > >> The data presented in this paper establishes that a common > >> OLTP workload > >> on PostgreSQL > >> can contend with SQL Server and with minimal tuning, is capable of > >> outperforming SQL > >> Server using the same load in an enterprise environment. > >> The number of actual users and throughput supported in any specific > >> customer situation > >> would naturally depend on the specifics of the application > >> used and the > >> degree of user > >> activity. > >> > >> http://pgsnake.blogspot.com/2010/05/postgres-vs-sql-server.html > >> > >> #---------------------------------- > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> LelandJ > >> > >> > >> [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/9ffcfb8f39d941aab447bb67e9c32...@bills ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
