From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964956AbWDMUjm (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Apr 2006 16:39:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932464AbWDMUjm (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Apr 2006 16:39:42 -0400 Received: from dvhart.com ([64.146.134.43]:11725 "EHLO dvhart.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932459AbWDMUjl (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Apr 2006 16:39:41 -0400 Message-ID: <443EB70B.3080908@mbligh.org> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:39:39 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051013) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jeff V. Merkey" Cc: K P , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: JVM performance on Linux (vs. Solaris/Windows) References: <62a080740604130753i4b8bbbckc3cba12092b54226@mail.gmail.com> <443E74C1.5090801@mbligh.org> <443EBC1D.1000307@wolfmountaingroup.com> In-Reply-To: <443EBC1D.1000307@wolfmountaingroup.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Note they ran the benchmark on an Opteron 285 instead of a Xeon with > 16 GB of memory. Opteron peformance currently **SUCKS** with 2.6 > series kernels under any kind of heavy I/O due to their cloning of the > ancient 82489DX architecture for I/O interrupt access and > performance. Looks like the test was stakced against Linux from the > start. Should have used a Xeon system. > AMD needs to get their crappy I/O performance up to snuff. Looking at > the test parameteres leads me to believe there was a lot of swapping > on a system with already poor I/O performance. > Looks to me like it was the same h/w for Linux as Solaris, so I don't think that's much of an excuse ;-) M.