Who did the test on W2K then? I do Linux, and I can't recall having seen W2K?
IIRC W2K has a brand new TCP/IP stack indeed. OTOH, I didn't have those problems on WinME. Sigh. --Maarten > Hi, > > I don't want to talk Rugby here now, but let's look at figures below once > again please. I first thought the slow Rebol tcp communication concerns > only Czech W95 + W98, but Pat is surely not using Czech Windows. > > pat665 wrote: > > Hi petr > > > > Following your request, I have tested rugby-core versus rugby-xpi. Here > > are the results : > > > > rugby-core (http) -> duration 0:00:59.98 > > rugby-xpi (tcp) -> duration 0:00:41.85 > > rugby-xpi (http) -> duration 0:00:40.7 > > So, loop of 100 echos lasts some 40 sec on W9x, while on W2K it is some 100 > - 150 request pers second! I would be really interested what is happening > with W9x TCP stack, and why it lags. Does it use delayed ACK? Does it > really matter what technique it uses in the background? Maybe more ppl here > could try below mentioned Rugby tests? > > console1: > > do %rugby.r > serve/with [echo] tcp://:8005 > > console2: > > do %rugby.r > do get-rugby-service http://localhost:8005 > start: now/time/precise loop 100 [echo "test"] print now/time/precise - > start > > I can't believe the lag is caused by Rugby architecture, it has to be > something under the hood of Windows API, and maybe some set-modes could be > used for tcp ports to tweak the performance .... > > Thanks a lot, > -pekr- -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
