Messages in this thread |  | | From | Gerrit Huizenga <> | Subject | Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000 | Date | Fri, 06 Sep 2002 12:05:27 -0700 |
| |
In message <20020906.114815.127906065.davem@redhat.com>, > : "David S. Miller" writes: > From: "Martin J. Bligh" <Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com> > Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 11:51:29 -0700 > > I see no reason why turning on NAPI should make the Apache setup > we have perform worse ... quite the opposite. Yes, we could use > Tux, yes we'd get better results. But that's not the point ;-) > > Of course. > > I just don't want propaganda being spread that using Tux means you > lose any sort of web server functionality whatsoever.
Ah sorry - I never meant to imply that Tux was detrimental, other than one case where it seemed to have no benefit and the performance numbers while tuning for TPC-W *seemed* worse but were never analyzed completely. That was the actual event that I meant when I said:
We also had some bad starts with using Tux in terms of performance and scalability on 4-CPU and 8-CPU machines, especially when combining with things like squid or other cacheing products from various third parties.
Those results were never quantified but for various reasons we had a team that decided to take Tux out of the picture. I think the problem was more likely lack of knowledge and lack of time to do analysis on the particular problems. Another combination of solutions was used.
So, any comments I made which might have implied that Tux/Tux2 made things worse have no substantiated data to prove that and it is quite possible that there is no such problem. Also, this was run nearly a year ago and the state of Tux/Tux2 might have been a bit different at the time.
gerrit - 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/
|  |