> Could it be possible for you to run benchmarks against O/Ses we have
> access to the source code instead of binary-only available ones. This
> would allow to learn a lot better from the differences. For example
> FreeBSD is as simple as Redhat to install and a base system will consume
> far less disk space than NT.
It is ok. He's not trying to do NT-vs-linux war, he tries to show
Linus that we have performance problems. And he did exactly that.
[Linus said serializing (some kind of operation) does not
matter. These results show that they _do_ matter. No need for
installing BSD.]
Pavel
> > Ok, I switched to a Seagate ST34520N (7200 rpm, scsi2 narrow, 4.5 GB),
> > and I added a new test: Linux-multi-thread vs Linux-multi-process. The
> > results are as I expected:
> >
> > -Linux-multi-process is more or less on par with NT. The 20% difference
> > could be the thread/process overhead.
> > -Linux-multi-thread is sloww.
> >
> > 450000 pages test file, ext2 and NTFS, 128 MB ram, Sym810 controller,
> > AMD K6/200
> >
> > # is the number of threads/processes which are running.
> >
> > # Linux-threads Linux-processes NT (threads)
> > 1 51 51 60
> > 16 51 67 96
> > 64 50 73 105
> > 128 48 75 107
> >
> > The modified source code is at
> > http://colorfullife.com/~manfreds/pagein/pagein.cpp
-- I'm really pavel@ucw.cz. Look at http://195.113.31.123/~pavel. Pavel Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/