On Fri, 16 Apr 1999, Dick Balaska wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
> > And this whole thread is way off topic, so unless someone can give comments
> > on the SMP scaling, I think we should end it here.
>
> No, i don't believe it is "way off topic". It does border on belonging
> in .advocacy; but the fact is that the "test" benchmarked
> Linux SMP vs. NT SMP and Linux failed. Miserably. If indeed Linux
> suffered a nervous breakdown and slid rapidly to 0 throughput, that
> needs to be addressed.
>
> It is important to find out what went wrong.
I think Jakob is right - that little "white paper" isn't worth discussing
any further here.
The general concensus is that SMP Linux didn't fail... it was purposely made
to fail. Done deal. Nothin' to discuss there.
When even ZD (whose "M" and "S" keys are surely worn out from them caressing
them) are openly suspicious of the test method, it's pretty clear that M$
and Mindcrash tried to pull the wool over everybody's eyes... and failed.
-Andy
Global Auctions
http://www.globalauctions.com
-
Linux SMP list: FIRST see FAQ at http://www.irisa.fr/prive/mentre/smp-faq/
To Unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe linux-smp" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
