From: Michael Poole <poole@troilus.org>
To: Paul Flinders <paul@dawa.demon.co.uk>
Cc: Gregory Maxwell <greg@linuxpower.cx>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: NT soon to surpass Linux in specweb99 performance?
Date: 02 Feb 2001 09:50:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3u26duoka.fsf@troilus.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010201143825.A21237@xi.linuxpower.cx> <3A79C156.A8F7FF58@dawa.demon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: Paul Flinders's message of "Thu, 01 Feb 2001 20:04:38 +0000"
Paul Flinders <paul@dawa.demon.co.uk> writes:
> Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> > Looks like TUX caught MS's attention:
> > http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/results/res2000q4/web99-20001211-00082.html
> >
> > Anyone know if their method of achieveing this is as flexible as TUX, or is
> > their "SWC 3.0" simply mean 'spec web cheat' and involve implimenting the
> > specweb dyanmic stuff in x86 assembly in their microkernel? :)
>
> Yeah, but Tux 2 is still faster on the same/similar hardware
>
> http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/results/res2000q4/web99-20001127-00075.html
Well, if you look closely, the Tux 2 system had an extra GigE card and
5 9GB 10KRPM drives instead of 1 9GB 10KRPM drive plus 8 16GB 15KRPM
drives under IIS, so the hardware wasn't exactly the same for both.
Perhaps more telling is that in both cases the "Conforming
Simultaneous Connections" was the same as the "Requested Connections"
-- suggesting that neither TUX 2.0 nor IIS were pushed to the breaking
point in the tests.
Before gloating about holding the highest performance, compare with
Zeus running on a (much beefier) IBM eServer:
http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/results/res2001q1/web99-20001225-00092.html
(And of course the normal disclaimers apply about how little benchmark
results reflect what "average" commercial deployments see.)
-- Michael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-02-02 14:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-02-01 19:38 NT soon to surpass Linux in specweb99 performance? Gregory Maxwell
2001-02-01 20:04 ` Paul Flinders
2001-02-01 20:03 ` Denis Perchine
2001-02-02 14:50 ` Michael Poole [this message]
2001-02-01 20:18 ` Walter Hofmann
2001-02-01 21:28 ` J Sloan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3u26duoka.fsf@troilus.org \
--to=poole@troilus.org \
--cc=greg@linuxpower.cx \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@dawa.demon.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox