THE SQL Server Blog Spot on the Web

Welcome to SQLblog.com - The SQL Server blog spot on the web Sign in | |
in Search

Denis Gobo

Windows Server 2008 and SQL Server 2008 Benchmarks

Microsoft released a document today with some SQL Server 2008 benchmarks

I found this sentence very interesting

The result demonstrates the scale-up capabilities of SQL Server 2008 on HP Integrity. The 10TB benchmark is so demanding that only six other results have been published in the nine-year history of TPC-H.

More information on the results is available at http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/events/HHHlaunch/docs/BenchmarkFS.doc

Published Wednesday, February 27, 2008 5:11 PM by Denis Gobo

Comments

 

RickHeiges said:

Just think, if I publish a TPC-H on my laptop, I'd get a top 10 ranking.  ;-)

Great Info!

February 27, 2008 4:35 PM
 

Linchi Shea said:

That's good because it means that SQL2008 will be released in six months (in August). Here's the better context in which to view the TPC-H result: http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/tpch_perf_results.asp.

February 27, 2008 5:28 PM
 

Alex Wellhausen said:

Sorry, why do you think it'll be August? Has the release date been shifted?

February 29, 2008 5:28 AM
 

Linchi Shea said:

Because the TPC benchmarks mandate that the system must be available in six months of the publication of any official benchmark result. Otherwise, the benchmark result must be withdrawn. I just checked, and the benchmark results indicate August 30 as the availability date.

February 29, 2008 8:14 AM
 

Larry Chesnut said:

OK, that's nice for the BI\DW side of the house.  Now impress me on the OLTP side with either TPC-C or E.  

So far, the only comparitive postings at this time are from IBM on the TPC-E, and there a 12% out of the box performance improvement is observed.

February 29, 2008 5:14 PM
 

David Powell said:

Linchi's right about the TPC's six-month rule. To my knowledge, SQL has never had to withdraw a result due to this rule, but I'm sure we'd do that if it were necessary to ship a high-quality final product. That we were able to deliver fairly diverse benchmark results, mostly on the February CTP bits, is a positive sign.

Larry: In addition to the new IBM x-Series TPC-E result, which shows a nice gain over SQL Server 2005, NEC also published SQL's first 64-core Itanium result on TPC-E. This is the new #1 TPC-E result at 1126 tpsE.

For OLTP, you won't see us publishing TPC-C results any longer, starting with SQL Server 2008; TPC-E is our new OLTP lighthouse. TPC-E is a far better model of modern OLTP applications, with referential integrity checks, realistic synthetic data, requirements for reliable storage, and a richer schema that has far more FK relationships than TPC-C, and uses a broader set of data types. Our experience with TPC-E has shown that customers are more likely to see gains on TPC-E benchmark results reflected on their own servers running their own OLTP apps.

March 2, 2008 12:35 PM
 

Linchi Shea said:

> For OLTP, you won't see us publishing TPC-C results any longer

I know MS has turned its attention to TPC-E for whatever reason. But not publishing TPC-C at all? I just checked TPC-C results, and the most recent TPC-C result from MS was as recent as Jan 7, 2008 with SQL2005.

March 3, 2008 10:46 PM
 

Paul said:

Microsoft just release a TPC-C on Dunnington 4 socket hexa core on SQL Server 2005 on Aug 19th 2008!! (http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_result_detail.asp?id=108081901)

So this goes against what's being said here and would lead some folks to feel that perhaps SS08 is purposely tuned for TPC-E and that hurts TPC-C? Perhaps consipracy theory, but odd indeed.

I don't disagree that TPC-E is more up to date, but so long as only SQL Server does it, results are moot. The market decides what is up to date and that seems to be TPC-C at the same time. To add that MS has had a large scale TPC-C result in a long time and likely couldn't topple today's leader (or ever last years) I think is a pretty big reason (mind you the top spots are theory benchmarks since nobody does that level of activity).

Let me close on why I like TPC-C. In the full disclosure you have to show the logger -- and all thing being =, in high end OLTP this is the chokepoint. When SQL Server logs about 6 KB/TX and Oracle and DB2 log less , it tells me there is a logging issue. When each time SQL Server checkpoints, performance drops, that is an issue. That's why I care about TPC-C -- it shows me how the database performs and the details behind it; not because I think it represents the real world.

August 20, 2008 8:47 PM
New Comments to this post are disabled

About Denis Gobo

I was born in Croatia in 1970, when I was one I moved to Amsterdam (and yes Ajax is THE team in Holland) and finally in 1993 I came to the US. I have lived in New York City for a bunch of years and currently live in Princeton, New Jersey with my wife and 3 kids. I work for Dow Jones as a Database architect in the indexes department, one drawback: since our data goes back all the way to May 1896 I cannot use smalldates ;-( I have been working with SQL server since version 6.5 and compared to all the other bloggers here I am a n00b. Some of you might know me from http://sqlservercode.blogspot.com/ or even from some of the newsgroups where I go by the name Denis the SQL Menace If you are a Tek-Tips user then you might know me by the name SQLDenis, I am one of the guys answering SQL Questions in the SQL Programming forum.

This Blog

Syndication

Privacy Statement