Tech Insider					     Technology and Trends


			      USENET Archives

From: Luoqi Chen <lu...@chen.ml.org>
Subject: NT4 server 2.5 times faster than Linux
Date: 1999/04/14
Message-ID: <3714EFA7.239DEBF5@chen.ml.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 466416844
Approved: n...@news1.mpcs.com
Sender: n...@news1.mpcs.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Delivered-To: freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Gateway: Unidirectional mail2news gateway at MPCS
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: mpc.lists.freebsd.hackers,muc.lists.freebsd.hackers
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Saw this on yesterday's slashdot news:
	http://www.mindcraft.com/whitepapers/nts4rhlinux.html
I wonder how well FreeBSD would perform.

-lq


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <j...@zippy.cdrom.com>
Subject: Re: NT4 server 2.5 times faster than Linux 
Date: 1999/04/15
Message-ID: <14436.924169145@zippy.cdrom.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 466655800
Approved: n...@news1.mpcs.com
Sender: n...@news1.mpcs.com
References: <199904150921.TAA28780@nymph.detir.qld.gov.au>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org
X-Gateway: Unidirectional mail2news gateway at MPCS
Newsgroups: mpc.lists.freebsd.hackers,muc.lists.freebsd.hackers
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> Now, what are the chances that FreeBSD Inc could purchase the services
> of Mindcraft to test a properly tuned FreeBSD box vs this NT box?

And what are the chances that anyone would trust the results of this
test after what they did to Linux and Novell? :) Seems to me like it
would be a waste of the kind of money they're likely to charge (and if
it were anything less than $10K, I'd be amazed).

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

From: Ulf Zimmermann <u...@Alameda.net>
Subject: Re: NT4 server 2.5 times faster than Linux
Date: 1999/04/15
Message-ID: <19990415024454.B81624@TelcoSucks.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 466657916
X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.1-STABLE
Approved: n...@news1.mpcs.com
Sender: n...@news1.mpcs.com
References: <199904150921.TAA28780@nymph.detir.qld.gov.au> 
<14436.924169145@zippy.cdrom.com>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Alameda Networks, Inc.
X-Gateway: Unidirectional mail2news gateway at MPCS
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: u...@Alameda.net
Newsgroups: mpc.lists.freebsd.hackers,muc.lists.freebsd.hackers
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Thu, Apr 15, 1999 at 02:39:05AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> > Now, what are the chances that FreeBSD Inc could purchase the services
> > of Mindcraft to test a properly tuned FreeBSD box vs this NT box?
> 
> And what are the chances that anyone would trust the results of this
> test after what they did to Linux and Novell? :) Seems to me like it
> would be a waste of the kind of money they're likely to charge (and if
> it were anything less than $10K, I'd be amazed).

What is the possibility to have a platform simular to the one Mindcraft
used and do our own testing ? Then do not repeat the errors they did.

Invite someone from the Linux community to participate and also someone
who could tune an NT box. I wouldn't mind to do something like that.

> 
> - Jordan
> 
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

-- 
Regards, Ulf.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ulf Zimmermann, 1525 Pacific Ave., Alameda, CA-94501, #: 510-769-2936
Alameda Networks, Inc. | http://www.Alameda.net  | Fax#: 510-521-5073


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

From: "Joachim Isaksson" <Joachim.Isaks...@ibfs.com>
Subject: Re: NT4 server 2.5 times faster than Linux 
Date: 1999/04/15
Message-ID: <004201be8724$e7b89a40$8cbc2dc1@ibfs.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 466657917
Approved: n...@news1.mpcs.com
Sender: n...@news1.mpcs.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <3714EFA7.239DEBF5@chen.ml.org> 
<199904150921.TAA28780@nymph.detir.qld.gov.au>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org
X-Priority: 3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211
Organization: Interbizz Financial Systems
X-Gateway: Unidirectional mail2news gateway at MPCS
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: mpc.lists.freebsd.hackers,muc.lists.freebsd.hackers
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

>> 2) "The Linux kernel limited itself to use only 960 MB of RAM"
>
> The box had 4GB of RAM, but Linux got to use less than 1GB.  Poor Linux.
> This was such a fair test! :-(  Do we recall a previous test where our
> favourite OS used only a portion of the total RAM?

Well, does Linux really limit itself to 960MB of RAM as they claim?
If so, I'd say it's not an unfair test to not limit NT to the same low memory
use.
If on the other hand they limited Linux to 960MB of RAM by not doing proper
tuning, that's another matter...

Guess I better go read up on the Linux people's opinion on the testing...

/me





To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

From: Greg Lehey <g...@lemis.com>
Subject: Re: NT4 server 2.5 times faster than Linux
Date: 1999/04/15
Message-ID: <19990415193124.U23745@lemis.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 466659945
Approved: n...@news1.mpcs.com
Sender: n...@news1.mpcs.com
References: <3714EFA7.239DEBF5@chen.ml.org> 
<199904150921.TAA28780@nymph.detir.qld.gov.au> 
<004201be8724$e7b89a40$8cbc2dc1@ibfs.com>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org
WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia
X-Gateway: Unidirectional mail2news gateway at MPCS
Mobile: +61-41-739-7062
Phone: +61-8-8388-8286
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: mpc.lists.freebsd.hackers,muc.lists.freebsd.hackers
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG
Fax: +61-8-8388-8725

On Thursday, 15 April 1999 at 11:46:58 +0200, Joachim Isaksson wrote:
>>> 2) "The Linux kernel limited itself to use only 960 MB of RAM"
>>
>> The box had 4GB of RAM, but Linux got to use less than 1GB.  Poor Linux.
>> This was such a fair test! :-(  Do we recall a previous test where our
>> favourite OS used only a portion of the total RAM?
>
> Well, does Linux really limit itself to 960MB of RAM as they claim?
> If so, I'd say it's not an unfair test to not limit NT to the same low memory
> use.

It looks as if they did.  To quote
http://www.lwn.net/1999/features/MindCraft1.0.phtml, which I found to
be a well-reasoned summary, though I didn't check their reasoning:

  Non-issues

      A few complaints that have been sent to us probably do not
      figure into the test results. We list them here in the hopes of
      helping to slow their propagation and improve the quality of
      information out there.

         Some complaints have been raised about the test being run on
         a 4GB server, even though the Linux kernel, in its default
         form, can only use 960M of that. Patches can be applied to
         make 2GB available fairly easily. But, in any case, they
         claim that NT was limited (with the maxmem parameter) to 1G
         of memory, so this aspect of the test was fair. It would have
         been more straightforward of them, however, to have simply
         remove the other 3G from the system.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers
finger g...@lemis.com for PGP public key


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <j...@zippy.cdrom.com>
Subject: Re: NT4 server 2.5 times faster than Linux 
Date: 1999/04/15
Message-ID: <14579.924170615@zippy.cdrom.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 466659946
Approved: n...@news1.mpcs.com
Sender: n...@news1.mpcs.com
References: <19990415024454.B81624@TelcoSucks.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org
X-Gateway: Unidirectional mail2news gateway at MPCS
Newsgroups: mpc.lists.freebsd.hackers,muc.lists.freebsd.hackers
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> What is the possibility to have a platform simular to the one Mindcraft
> used and do our own testing ? Then do not repeat the errors they did.

I can loan you a quad Xeon with 1GB of memory if you like (better
bring your truck though) but I can't say much about the actual
benchmarking software you'd use or how you'd simulate (or obtain) the
number of client machines they used.  That remains an open question for
which I've no practical answers.

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

			        About USENET

USENET (Users’ Network) was a bulletin board shared among many computer
systems around the world. USENET was a logical network, sitting on top
of several physical networks, among them UUCP, BLICN, BERKNET, X.25, and
the ARPANET. Sites on USENET included many universities, private companies
and research organizations. See USENET Archives.

		       SCO Files Lawsuit Against IBM

March 7, 2003 - The SCO Group filed legal action against IBM in the State 
Court of Utah for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference, 
unfair competition and breach of contract. The complaint alleges that IBM 
made concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of 
UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's Linux services 
business. See SCO vs IBM.

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or
research.

Electronic mail:			       WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com			  http://tech-insider.org/