toggle

AAPL Stock: 562.29 ( -3.03 )

MacNN News

Server performance on Mac OS X, G5 platform

updated 10:45 am EDT, Tue September 6, 2005

Mac OS X performance

Following an earlier review that concluded that on the same PowerPC G5 platform The article compared MySQL, Apache, and low level benchmarking on both Mac OS X and Linux to find that Mac OS X's threading model was the "achilles heel" of the OS, but notes that the newer GCC 4.0 compiler improves FP signficantly: "You might not have noticed it, but there is in fact a lot of good news in this article for owners of current Apple systems. Gcc 4.0 promises a lot better (FP) performance in open source software.

"The improvement from gcc 4.0 over gcc 3.3.3 and 3.3 is amazing on the PowerFX family: almost a 70% improved FP performance! Now that the open source community finally has a decent compiler for the Apple platform, Apple management decides to step over to another architecture. Ironically, right now, the Intel architecture needs a super-optimized compiler (Intel's own) to reach the FP performance that the G5 now reaches with a very popular but far less aggressive compiler (gcc)."

by MacNN Staff

(14)

TAGS :

enterprise, servers

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

pinskia
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2005

0

09/06, 11:13am | report spam | close Reply |
Apple did not do much

Apple did not support the development of GCC 4.0 as much as other companies like Redhat and SUSE. And now with the movement to x86, they are working on fixing bugs with respect with x86 rather than improving the compiler overall.

pinskia
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2005

0

09/06, 11:15am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Apple did not do much

I forgot IBM too.

Cless
Registered User

Joined: Jun 2003

0

09/06, 11:20am | report spam | close Reply |
Compilation

In any event, one would assume that at least the next two releases of OS X (approximately 3.5 to 4 years given the most recent time frame for release, ) will be compiled for PPC, as the Mac OS was compiled for 68040 for 4 years after PowerPC's debut in the 90's. It would make sense that these releases would be compiled with GCC 4.0.

that one guy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2005

0

09/06, 12:26pm | report spam | close Reply |
The study was flawed

If I remember correctly, there are some pretty serious flaws with MySQl under Mac OSX, and MySQL has been tuned to run better under linux. I do believe that MacOSX may not be tuned as well as a linux system for serving, but Oracle seems to believe that MacOSX is good enough for them.

ddukes
Junior Member

Joined: Aug 2000

0

09/06, 12:45pm | report spam | close Reply |
RE: The study was flawed

Link?

climacs
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2001

0

09/06, 12:55pm | report spam | close Reply |
Let the AAPL soar

anyone know why AAPL is up 5.4% so far today?

zwiebel_
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Jun 2003

0

09/06, 01:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
RE: climacs

iPod phone?

zioncity
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2005

0

09/06, 01:32pm | report spam | close Reply |
RE: apple stock

No silly wabbits...

The powerbook g5 is coming... hahaha!!! Sorry, could not resist. Maybe it is a combination of new iPods, iCell Phone, Mac Mini and other stuff... maybe something totally new... like a mac tivo or something and I forgot a iPod video device.

Only time will tell. :)

koolkid1976
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2003

0

09/06, 01:39pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: The study was flawed

You didn't read the Anandtech article did you?

ValkRaider
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

09/06, 02:31pm | report spam | close Reply |
RE: The study was flawed

The whole point was to find out *why* MySql and Apache run slower under OSX than they do under Linux - ON THE SAME G5 HARDWARE.

They already *knew* that MySql was poor under OSX, and they were investigating WHY.

Running Oracle won't help you understand what is causing MySql to perform poorly.

I suggest you go READ the Anandtech article.

that one guy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2005

0

09/06, 03:03pm | report spam | close Reply |
RE: The study was flawed

No, MySQL runs bad under OSX because there are some serious bugs in the Mac version. Recompiling with a more optimized compiler will not fix the bugs. As one slashdot postser said "Why, oh why, do they insist on MySQL? They state in the article that they learned of the FSync bug in MySQL (which many of us pointed to last time). Why don't they throw PostgreSQL in there and see how it performs?"

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

09/06, 03:27pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: the study

No, MySQL runs bad under OSX because there are some serious bugs in the Mac version. Recompiling with a more optimized compiler will not fix the bugs. As one slashdot postser said "Why, oh why, do they insist on MySQL? They state in the article that they learned of the FSync bug in MySQL (which many of us pointed to last time). Why don't they throw PostgreSQL in there and see how it performs

OK, it has bugs. Big friggin' deal. So, being that its open-source, can't anyone fix them? SUSE and RedHat seem to do some fine tuning for the Linux arena, why can't apple put some polish on the OS X end, if they cared (which they don't). Or if some of the community who knows what these problems are actually fix it instead of just spouting off that "there's problems" and "why not use this instead?".

And they most likely used it because its currently the most popular of the SQL databases being used out there.

I know, you'd all like it if they compared stuff that was highly optimized for the mac so you could at least pretend that you're running neck and neck with other OS's and platforms, but that doesn't magically happen. Open source is great, as long as you can find someone willing to do the work.

that one guy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2005

0

09/06, 07:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
Makes sense to me

Lets compare different operating systems with two different programs, even though the implementation on one is buggy and flawed. That will give us some good data to analyze. If you want to compare the two OS's then use something that is as close to equal as possible. It probably is the case that linux is a better server operating system than MacOS,(most likely a certainty with the lastest 2.6.x kernels) but using MySQL as a metric is not the way to do it.

benj
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 1999

0

09/07, 09:26am | report spam | close Reply |
any major server admin

Will appreciate Anandtech's evaluation. Still, it makes little or no difference to a realworld installation. Any admin worth their bits will optimize and maintain a server to it's peak performance with regard to the workload and administration needs. Metrics only tell part of the story. Simplicity (yes even in the CLI) is essential for the Mac Platform. I used to handroll Oracle on yellowdog. What a beast. I think Apple's main idea is to create a workgroup/enterprise serving environment that is "generically" useful out of the box, but can be also be "hotrodded" to the environments needed. This might include linux installation. But really- what would you prefer to work with? A g5 Server is great-surely it doesn't quite meet "Ultra geek" requirements for optimized computing out of the box. I do think Apple will address much of the optimizing issues once the Intel Transistion is clearer. I don't think we'll have to wait 3-4 years either.

I personally would rather have something that is relatively easy to set up and evaluate, than to go through a whole line by line optimization procedure. People always complain about configuring this stuff. My experience is that it always an ongoing process. -b

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple hiring new chip engineers for...
05/25	Third-gen iPad coming to Philippines...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...
05/24	Apple submits surprise optical stylus...

Show All

05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...
05/25	Google picks up webOS Enyo team, Open...
05/24	Apple submits surprise optical stylus...
05/24	Yahoo releases Axis 'visual search'...

Show All

05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/23	Google launches redesigned Search app...
05/22	Leaked next-gen iPod touch part hints...
05/22	Hulu Plus updates with iPad Retina...
05/22	TiVo Stream to push TV to iPhones,...

Show All

03/02	Save $330 on refurb. 15.4-inch, 2.4GHz...
03/01	Pre-owned 8GB iPod touch 2G, drops...
02/29	$150 off Nikon Coolpix S80 Compact...
02/28	Plantronics BackBeat 903 Bluetooth...
02/27	Refurb. Seagate 1.5TB GoFlex Portable...

Show All

toggle

Server performance on Mac OS X, G5 platform

updated 10:45 am EDT, Tue September 6, 2005

Mac OS X performance

Apple did not do much

Re: Apple did not do much

Compilation

The study was flawed

RE: The study was flawed

Let the AAPL soar

RE: climacs

RE: apple stock

re: The study was flawed

RE: The study was flawed

RE: The study was flawed

Re: the study

Makes sense to me

any major server admin

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace

Server performance on Mac OS X, G5 platform

updated 10:45 am EDT, Tue September 6, 2005

Mac OS X performance

Related Articles

Recent Articles

Apple did not do much

Re: Apple did not do much

Compilation

The study was flawed

RE: The study was flawed

Let the AAPL soar

RE: climacs

RE: apple stock

re: The study was flawed

RE: The study was flawed

RE: The study was flawed

Re: the study

Makes sense to me

any major server admin

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace