From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 18 May 2001 15:51:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 18 May 2001 15:51:35 -0400 Received: from ztxmail05.ztx.compaq.com ([161.114.1.209]:523 "HELO ztxmail05.ztx.compaq.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 18 May 2001 15:51:28 -0400 Message-ID: <3B057C33.7874AF71@zk3.dec.com> Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:46:59 -0400 From: Peter Rival Organization: Tru64 QMG Performance Engineering X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "David S. Miller" Cc: J Sloan , Ronald Bultje , linux-kernel Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Linux scalability? In-Reply-To: <990173560.6346.0.camel@adslgw> <990174686.12881.18.camel@tux.bitfreak.net> <3B0577E0.A4CAF354@mirai.cx> <15109.31311.679701.484140@pizda.ninka.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "David S. Miller" wrote: > J Sloan writes: > > Microsoft finally managed to get a better result using > > an all-out, "bet the farm", "benchmark buster" setup > > with a special web cache in front of iis. > > I haven't heard anyone talk about the fact that their 8-cpu numbers > got disqualified and aren't even mentioned on the SPEC site on the > main tables anymore. > Really? I just checked and it's still there from what I see. We're talking about the Dell 8450/700 w/ IIS & SWC 3.0 result, right? I'm hoping that they're deemed NC, but I don't see it yet... - Pete