Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Are TPC Benchmarks A Worthwhile Measure?

Posted by Cliff on from the accurate-measure-or-just-another-number dept.

KhaosSpawn asks: "Microsoft is back at the top of the TPC-C performance results and has all ten spots in the top ten by price category. But how many of you work for companies that own a ProLiant 8500-700-192P machine? Are there any results for 2 and 4 way machines? Are there any statistics which include Linux installations? Does this TPC figure mean anything in terms of real world deployment or is this just another number for the Microsoft Marketing Machine?"

2 of 4 comments (clear)

  1. TPC-C is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Check out the various tuning and tweaking that goes on. Its all in the full disclosure reports.

    Unless your application happens to exactly match (identical queries and similar data sets) TPC-C is worthless.

    There are TPC benchmarks that give the vendors much less information (so they can't optimize specifically for the benchmarks at the expense of everything else), but literally no vendors run them, since they can't control the results as well. TPC-C munging is a pretty well understood science these days.

  2. click on non clustered.. by Zurk · · Score: 2

    and micro$hit doesnt show up AT ALL. these benchmarks are highly suspect...as in most benchmarks. basically you wont get low end benchmarks since most vendors have banned them but in general quad cpu machines are ok for most databases when backed with fiber channel arrays with hardware RAID controllers. remember than the bus and disk bandwidth is more important than the cpu speed...in general db/2 7.1 on a quad xeon 700 with 2 meg cpu cache with an icp-vortex fiber controller running linux is what i'd choose for a decent low end db server..a gig of ram should be enough.