Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 14:09:23 -0700 From: Gregory Sutter <gsutter@pobox.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Linux vs. NT, take 2.] Message-ID: <19990629140923.C40465@001101.zer0.org> In-Reply-To: <45720.930688191@zippy.cdrom.com>; from Jordan K. Hubbard on Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 01:29:51PM -0700 References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9906291620290.63857-100000@freebie.dp.ny.frb.org> <45720.930688191@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 01:29:51PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > Is there any validity to the discussion on -hackers that real-world > > application performance doesn't corroborate the poor benchmark results > > (as far as FreeBSD is concerned)? I'm less concerned that benchmarks > > Plenty. Netbench is notorious for not actually testing the load > balancing abilities or performance degradation curve as the number of > users increases, both important factors in "real life" testing. Another factor that is not taken into account in any benchmark is general OS stability. NT may be able to kick our butts in some application performance tests, but can they continue to deliver that performance for a year without administrative intervention? I doubt that most NT boxen are anywhere near that stable. Uptime and platform stability is as important as performance. Greg -- Gregory S. Sutter "Software is like sex; it's better mailto:gsutter@pobox.com when it's free." -- Linus Torvalds http://www.pobox.com/~gsutter/ PGP DSS public key 0x40AE3052 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990629140923.C40465>