Re: [WebDNA] Speed test: Maxed out Mac mini
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2013
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 110346
interpreted = N
texte = --Apple-Mail=_C1CDCCC1-B710-4669-8E10-DFD24CB55C77 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Nice, Brian :-) Encouraging.=20 On 2013-04-18, at 7:10 PM, Brian Fries wrote: > Just a bit of an FYI / brag=85 >=20 > I just got our new Mac mini server set up. This is fully maxed out on = the Apple store - 2.6GHz i7, 16 GB RAM, dual 250GB SSD drives, $1999 US. >=20 > Set up with WebDNA Server 6.2, and the first thing I did was pull out = the old WebDNA speed test: >=20 > http://www.euca.us/webdnatest/show_speed.html >=20 > The previous top score was held by "Core2Duo E8400 @3.0ghz, 2GB Ram, = 400GB SATA HDD, CentOS 5.3 (Final), Cicada 6.2 Apache 2.2.13" >=20 > This mini will be replacing a 2.5 year old Mac mini server, spec'ed as = 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo, 4 GB RAM, dual 7200 RPM 500GB disks. >=20 > New mini Old mini Old = Record Holder > Total Ticks 151 191 166=09 > % Improvement -- 26% 10% >=20 > In these results, the first 2 seconds of the test are simply a 2 = second delay used to see how many ticks are in 2 seconds, and has no = bearing on the system's performance. Subtracting out those 2 seconds, = the results are much more dramatic: >=20 > New mini Old mini Old = Record Holder > Test-Only Ticks 30 79 44 > % Improvement -- 163% 47% >=20 > The "Test-Only Ticks" results subtract out the first 121-122 ticks of = the test, which is simply a 2 second delay used to see how many ticks = are in 2 seconds, and has no bearing on the system's performance. >=20 > I expect the performance difference will be even greater than this = when used with very large databases, due to the speed of the SSD, and = with multiple simultaneous requests, due to the additional processing = cores. >=20 > So far, very pleased. We have some upcoming projects that will involve = millions of database records, and this should provide enough performance = improvement to make that feasible. >=20 > - Brian Fries > --------------------------------------------------------- This message = is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To = unsubscribe, E-mail to: archives: = http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug Reporting: = support@webdna.us --Apple-Mail=_C1CDCCC1-B710-4669-8E10-DFD24CB55C77 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Nice, = Brian :-)
Encouraging.
On = 2013-04-18, at 7:10 PM, Brian Fries wrote:
Just = a bit of an FYI / brag=85
I just got our new Mac mini = server set up. This is fully maxed out on the Apple store - 2.6GHz i7, = 16 GB RAM, dual 250GB SSD drives, $1999 US.
Set = up with WebDNA Server 6.2, and the first thing I did was pull out the = old WebDNA speed test:
The previous top = score was held by "Core2Duo E8400 = @3.0ghz, 2GB Ram, 400GB SATA HDD, CentOS 5.3 (Final), Cicada 6.2 Apache = 2.2.13"
This mini will be = replacing a 2.5 year old Mac mini server, spec'ed as 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo, = 4 GB RAM, dual 7200 RPM 500GB disks.
New = mini = Old mini Old = Record Holder
Total = Ticks = 151 = 191 = 166 =
% Improvement = -- = 26% = 10%
In these results, the = first 2 seconds of the test are simply a 2 second delay used to see how many = ticks are in 2 seconds, and has no bearing on the system's performance. = Subtracting out those 2 seconds, the results are much more = dramatic:
= New miniOld mini Old = Record Holder
Test-Only = Ticks = 30 = 79 = 44
% = Improvement = -- = 163% = 47%
The "Test-Only Ticks" = results subtract out the first 121-122 ticks of the test, which is = simply a 2 second delay used to see how many ticks are in 2 = seconds, and has no bearing on the system's = performance.
I expect the performance = difference will be even greater than this when used with very large = databases, due to the speed of the SSD, and with multiple simultaneous = requests, due to the additional processing = cores.
So far, very pleased. We have some = upcoming projects that will involve millions of database records, and = this should provide enough performance improvement to make that = feasible.
- Brian Fries
= --Apple-Mail=_C1CDCCC1-B710-4669-8E10-DFD24CB55C77--
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
--Apple-Mail=_C1CDCCC1-B710-4669-8E10-DFD24CB55C77 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Nice, Brian :-) Encouraging.=20 On 2013-04-18, at 7:10 PM, Brian Fries wrote: > Just a bit of an FYI / brag=85 >=20 > I just got our new Mac mini server set up. This is fully maxed out on = the Apple store - 2.6GHz i7, 16 GB RAM, dual 250GB SSD drives, $1999 US. >=20 > Set up with WebDNA Server 6.2, and the first thing I did was pull out = the old WebDNA speed test: >=20 > http://www.euca.us/webdnatest/show_speed.html >=20 > The previous top score was held by "Core2Duo E8400 @3.0ghz, 2GB Ram, = 400GB SATA HDD, CentOS 5.3 (Final), Cicada 6.2 Apache 2.2.13" >=20 > This mini will be replacing a 2.5 year old Mac mini server, spec'ed as = 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo, 4 GB RAM, dual 7200 RPM 500GB disks. >=20 > New mini Old mini Old = Record Holder > Total Ticks 151 191 166=09 > % Improvement -- 26% 10% >=20 > In these results, the first 2 seconds of the test are simply a 2 = second delay used to see how many ticks are in 2 seconds, and has no = bearing on the system's performance. Subtracting out those 2 seconds, = the results are much more dramatic: >=20 > New mini Old mini Old = Record Holder > Test-Only Ticks 30 79 44 > % Improvement -- 163% 47% >=20 > The "Test-Only Ticks" results subtract out the first 121-122 ticks of = the test, which is simply a 2 second delay used to see how many ticks = are in 2 seconds, and has no bearing on the system's performance. >=20 > I expect the performance difference will be even greater than this = when used with very large databases, due to the speed of the SSD, and = with multiple simultaneous requests, due to the additional processing = cores. >=20 > So far, very pleased. We have some upcoming projects that will involve = millions of database records, and this should provide enough performance = improvement to make that feasible. >=20 > - Brian Fries > --------------------------------------------------------- This message = is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To = unsubscribe, E-mail to: archives: = http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug Reporting: = support@webdna.us --Apple-Mail=_C1CDCCC1-B710-4669-8E10-DFD24CB55C77 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Nice, = Brian :-)
Encouraging.
On = 2013-04-18, at 7:10 PM, Brian Fries wrote:
Just = a bit of an FYI / brag=85
I just got our new Mac mini = server set up. This is fully maxed out on the Apple store - 2.6GHz i7, = 16 GB RAM, dual 250GB SSD drives, $1999 US.
Set = up with WebDNA Server 6.2, and the first thing I did was pull out the = old WebDNA speed test:
The previous top = score was held by "Core2Duo E8400 = @3.0ghz, 2GB Ram, 400GB SATA HDD, CentOS 5.3 (Final), Cicada 6.2 Apache = 2.2.13"
This mini will be = replacing a 2.5 year old Mac mini server, spec'ed as 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo, = 4 GB RAM, dual 7200 RPM 500GB disks.
New = mini = Old mini Old = Record Holder
Total = Ticks = 151 = 191 = 166 =
% Improvement = -- = 26% = 10%
In these results, the = first 2 seconds of the test are simply a 2 second delay used to see how many = ticks are in 2 seconds, and has no bearing on the system's performance. = Subtracting out those 2 seconds, the results are much more = dramatic:
= New miniOld mini Old = Record Holder
Test-Only = Ticks = 30 = 79 = 44
% = Improvement = -- = 163% = 47%
The "Test-Only Ticks" = results subtract out the first 121-122 ticks of the test, which is = simply a 2 second delay used to see how many ticks are in 2 = seconds, and has no bearing on the system's = performance.
I expect the performance = difference will be even greater than this when used with very large = databases, due to the speed of the SSD, and with multiple simultaneous = requests, due to the additional processing = cores.
So far, very pleased. We have some = upcoming projects that will involve millions of database records, and = this should provide enough performance improvement to make that = feasible.
- Brian Fries
= --Apple-Mail=_C1CDCCC1-B710-4669-8E10-DFD24CB55C77--
John Buler
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
Limit to variables being passed??? (1998)
Press Release hit the NewsWire!!! (1997)
Emailer compatibility..... (1998)
syntax question, not in online refernce (1997)
Typhoon Rev. and PCS store problems (1999)
[WebDNA] WebDNA jQuery JSON javascript stuff (2010)
Can you identify the [body]? (1999)
WebCat2 beta 11 - new prefs ... (1997)
requiredfields (2002)
& in Lookups (1997)
Showif with an or (2003)
Archives are missing (2003)
[format xs] freeze (1997)
800x600 (2003)
delayed email response (2005)
Email (1998)
Online reference (1997)
Separate SSL Server (1997)
[WebDNA] Feature Request: [returnhtml] (2016)
switching users (1998)