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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 07 2001 - 21:00:28 EST