Quoting Stefan Manegold:
We did try once and fixed the problems we found then. But we do not currently have access on a FreeBSD machine and therefor cannot run our nightly testing easily. So its a lack of time and/or resources.
Have you asked any of the mailing lists freebsd-questions@, freebsd-database@ or freebsd-ports@ mailing lists. Regrettably I cannot offer a test platform myself for the time being, but some people on those mailing lists might be able to help you. I did a quick "make ; make check" and at least that did not whine awfully much compare to the number of test it did. Anyhow eventually the test complained in relatively strong words... !ERROR: Testing FAILED SIGNIFICANTLY ! 1 out of 296 tests could not be executed 2 out of 296 tests produced slightly different output 4 out of 296 tests produced SIGNIFICANTLY different output Since my test environment was a dual processor system I can confirm that lt-Mserver was occasionally using about 120% of one processor cpu time. So, it seems to be able to split its work load to multiple cpus. Have you done any other documented performance comparisons with lets say postgresql but the one table shown in http://monetdb.cwi.nl/Research/Benchmarks/ The figures in there are very promising indeed. It would be nice to see similar tables compiled about multiple tests stressing different features. It would also make a world of difference to anyone who is not really so much a database expert, if the nature and content of the tests were explained in more detail. Cheers, // jau .--- ..- -.- -.- .- .- .-.-.- ..- -.- -.- --- -. . -. / Jukka A. Ukkonen, Oxit Ltd, Finland /__ M.Sc. (sw-eng & cs) (Phone) +358-500-606-671 / Internet: Jukka.Ukkonen(a)Oxit.Fi (Home) +358-9-6215-280 / Internet: jau(a)iki.fi v .--- .- ..- ...-.- .. -.- .. .-.-.- ..-. .. + + + + My opinions are mine and mine alone, not my employers. + + + +