Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 05 Nov 2001 20:46:29 -0800 | From | J Sloan <> | Subject | Re: [khttpd-users] khttpd vs tux |
| |
Ingo,
Thanks for commenting on this -
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, J Sloan wrote: > > > Nobody scales better 1-4 CPUs, as indicated > > by specweb99 - at 8 CPUs linux is OK, but not > > as dominating.... > > This is a common misinterpretation of the TUX SPECweb99 numbers. > Performance and scalability are two distinct things.
Absolutely correct, I spoke sloppily. I should have said, "nobody performs better...".
But the scalability certainly _appears_ to be better than average -
> TUX maxes out 2-way and 4-way systems as well, while IIS does not appear > to do a good job there. So we can say that it's proven that IIS does not > scale well. I can still not say whether Linux+TUX scales well, i can only > say that it's too fast for the given hardware :-)
indeed...
> why does it look like as if TUX scaled well on 1, 2, 4 CPUs? Because > hardware designers are sizing up systems with more CPUs, so the true > limits of the hardware show a similar scalability graph as the scalability > graph would be of a scalable webserver.
Excellent point, thanks for making the distinction.
Thanks as well for the other excellent insights, it was informative to hear what you had to say.
cu
jjs
- 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/
|  |