Slashdot Mirror


Linux Grabs World Record For TPC-H Benchmark

An Anonymous Coward writes: "Linux 2.4.3 now holds the world record by performance with IBM's DB2 in TPC-H. TPC-H is a decision support benchmark consisting of a suite of business oriented and ad-hoc queries and concurrent data modifications. This is way cool as the world record was held by SQL Server 2000 on Windows 2000 before." Caveats: this is only in the 100GB (smallest) category, and all but 2 of the other entries are several months old. Even so;)

6 of 233 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Enterprises using Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5

    Um, did you notice that the linux benchmark was $347/QphH while the next one on the list (W2K) is $161/QphH. Which one is more expen$ive?

  2. What do they need to spin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5

    You may have to shell out thousands for the software (vs free Linux) but the _machine_ dominates by a lot. The Linux configuration was 4x the cost of the Windows configuration ($1M vs $250K).

    There's really three different markets, with Linux winning two and Windows winning one.

    Under 1 GB is dominated by Linux. It's cheap, it's fast. Hard to sell software to this market because the total budget is usually in the low thousands at most.

    1 GB-100 GB is decent with Windows. Much more bang for the buck then the Linux solution. At the top end, Windows just can't handle the load and buckles. At the bottom end, it starts becoming unrealistic to really spend a lot of money on your database.

    Over 100 GB is dominated by the hard-core *nices. Linux can probably be used seriously now although a lot of companies would rather go with the proven solution and pay. When $10k software is under 1% of your total purchase price, free OS vs paid OS isn't much of an issue.

  3. Look at the Scalability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5
    I think most people are missing the point of the this benchmark result.

    Although it seems very logically that a 4 machine cluster is faster than it's single machine counterpart, it's not that simple an equation.

    Not every database or operating system can scale that well. Lets take a look at each individual machine of the cluster. They are SGI 1450s with 4-way Xeon 700Mhz. The nearest competitor on the performance chart is the NEC 4-way machine, which is at 800. Assuming each individual machine of this cluster is also at about 800 tpm, then the cluster scaled at 85%. Not too shabby. Can you do the same type of scaling with Oracle? Not likely(look at any of the Oracle benchmarks, the biggest cluster they got have two machines).

    Also, if you have recently read what the Oracle guys have been asking the kernel developers, you would know that there are a lot of features that the Linux kernel is missing right now causing it to not perform optimally as a DB server. The SGI and IBM guys have worked hard to get around every one of these barriers in order to get these results. This really shows that both these companies are very dedicated to make Linux be the top choice as DB servers in the future.

    I don't want to burst anyone's bubble, but Linux off the shelve at the moment is still a very immature operating system for a DB server. However, with the work of companies like SGI and IBM, Linux now has a top result on a industry recognized benchmark.I wouldn't be surprise if there are more results coming in the near future.

    Congrats to both companies for this great result!

  4. "too good to be true", "perfect", "cool because.." by macpeep · · Score: 5

    What's wrong with you?

    Why does it seem that most people spend most of their time hoping for something bad to happen to Microsoft? If there's a security problem with a Microsoft product, it's not a *good* thing, much less is it "too good to be true"! If Linux scores better in a database test, it's a good thing because it means there have been advancements in software. It's not a good thing because Microsoft came 2nd.

    The whole culture of hate here on Slashdot (and in the open source community in general) really bothers me.. Why do you have to hate something? Why isn't it enough for you that Linux or your favorite open source project is successful and works great? Why do you have to stomp everything else? No wonder people say "open source, closed minds".

    If it was just 13 year olds writing the comments, I'd understand it. But it's the editors of Slashdot too! You guys really should set a better example than that. Even Linus Torvalds said in a recent CNET interview that he doesn't understand why everyone hates Bill Gates so much.

    It's much more productive - and much better for the cause (which is to make better software, remember?) - to focus your energy in positive things. Write software, report bugs, test.. Sure, celebrate Linux being first in a database test, but don't celebrate it because it knocked away Windows 2000 & SQL Server 2000 from that spot.

    Define yourself by what you are for - not by what you are against.

  5. So is this now a legit benchmark?!?!?!? by alexhmit01 · · Score: 5

    Okay, so a few months ago, you ran an article: Are TPC Benchmarks A Worthwhile Measure? where this test was derided as being a worthless measurement? It was seen as "not realistic" because nobody needs those kind of servers... At least on Slashdot.

    So now that SGI cranks out a server with twice the processors and knocks off a half year old record, it's legitimate because Linux wins?

    This is absurd. Either this is a legit benchmark or not, make up your mind. If you justify hype like this, then you are no better than MS's FUD teams.

    You can't honestly view benchmarks as: well, when Linux wins they are the holy grail, but when someone else wins, it's rigged.

    Alex

  6. What this means by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 5

    There are a lot of problems with coming out and saying that Linux is the hands-down winner of this benchmark. The first problem is that the Linux system has twice as many processors as the next system down. The second problem is that the system costs twice as much as the next runner up. For these reasons alone it is foolhardy to immediately claim that Linux is now the undisputed heavyweight champion of the database world.

    However, the story is more than that. The most important thing to notice is not that Linux is at the top, or the number of processors is so high, or even that the cost is exorbitant. The important thing is the Linux is a contender at all. This is an OS that hasn't until recently gotten a lot of respect. That Linux can "keep up with the big boys", it shows that it is certainly capable of handling the computing needs of the corporate community.

    Of course, if you live by the benchmark, you die by the benchmark. Linux apologists would do well to acknowledge that it only breaks the world record because the hardware is twice as powerful as the next OS's. However, they can still crow about the significant progress that Linux has made over its relatively short lifetime. What other OS has gone from 0 to 60 in such a short time?

    Dancin Santa