From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailserv2.iuinc.com (IDENT:qmailr@mailserv2.iuinc.com [206.245.164.55]) by puffin.external.hp.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA13059 for ; Wed, 27 Dec 2000 11:47:14 -0700 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.linuxcare.com) (216.88.157.131) by mailserv2.iuinc.com with SMTP; 27 Dec 2000 18:50:18 -0000 Received: from ottawa.linuxcare.com (HELO linuxcare.com) (216.208.98.2) by smtp.linuxcare.com with SMTP; 27 Dec 2000 18:50:19 -0000 Sender: adevries@mailserv2.iuinc.com Message-ID: <3A4A3ABA.4EC6D5A7@linuxcare.com> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 13:53:46 -0500 From: Alex deVries MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox CC: parisc-linux@thepuffingroup.com Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] performance References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-ID: Alan Cox wrote: > > http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/results/res2000q4/ > > > > This shows some PA-RISC machines running HPUX performing reasonably > > well. > > Specweb is basically a con. Its not a materially valuable benchmark. It benches > how fast your irq handler path is, how fast your memory cache is, how good > your DMA transfers are. It has almost nothing to do with how good a web > server the box is. I agree that specweb might not actually be functionally practical. This might not be the case with specweb, but sometimes specifications do have the ability to influence customers regardless of their validity. That's interesting for one reason: if the marketing helps make potential customers think that parisc-linux is fast, they'll buy parisc boxes, and HP is more likely to allocate developer time on this project. - Alex -- Alex deVries, Principal Solutions Architect, The Puffins at Linuxcare 613.562.2759 tel alex@linuxcare.com, http://www.linuxcare.com/ Linuxcare, Support for the revolution.