Brian Cryer wrote:
> "Captain Paralytic" <paul_lautman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:04e3cb42-860b-449d-ad9e-5da39083e72d@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> On 13 May, 11:57, "Brian Cryer" <www.cryer.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Moving to a non-Vista machine is not an ideal option
>> I guess it depends where you're coming from. IMO, using Vista is
>> always far from ideal.
>
> That used to be my impression (and to be honest still mostly is) ... but
> if you have a "super dooper" machine then Vista just about matches xp
> for performance, and Vista does have some nice features. Since my new
> desktop is a quad core beast with as much RAM as it will take and a
> respectiable graphics card, Vista does work quite well. However we have
> machines in the office that would fly if they were running XP but only
> crawl because they run Vista. That said, even with a "super dooper"
> machine there are still compatibility issues with some software not
> running which worked fine on XP.
>
> So in most cases I'd agree with you.
>
> On this particular MySQL issue, I still don't know whether its a Vista
> issue or an issue with my installation ...
>


do yourself a favor and re-image one of the "older" boxes with some
version of Linux - which generally includes mysql - move your db to this
host and you will see database speeds that cannot be matched on any
windows box... This would be an n-tier architecture and because of the
new db speed you should not notice any performance degradation.