Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 3 Nov 2001 17:49:45 +0100 | From | bert hubert <> | Subject | Re: khttpd vs tux |
| |
On Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 05:45:29PM +0100, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote: > > tux holds all records, khttpd has been measured to be slower than some > > userspace webservers. > > What's bad about tux, then? There usually is something...
The main hurdle for Tux is that it is not in the mainstream kernel, and consists of a patch. I think RedHat has precompiled kernels with Tux in them. The aa kernels also contain tux.
There are also strong indications that 'zero copy tcp/ip' may enable userspace webservers to achieve comparable bandwidths (many gbits/second). See for example X15: http://www.chromium.com/x15tech.html
Regards,
bert
-- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Software & Services Trilab The Technology People Netherlabs BV / Rent-a-Nerd.nl - Nerd Available - 'SYN! .. SYN|ACK! .. ACK!' - the mating call of the internet - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |