Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 14:10:36 +0100 From: "Marco van de Voort" <marcov@stack.nl> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fork test Message-ID: <20000405121137.CF1C92E804@hermes.tue.nl> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004050159400.10783-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10004051404490.28487-100000@inet.ssc.nsu.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Well, after very short time, both boxes responded to console switchings > > and things like that, but trying to run something like "ps", "w", > > "uptime" put machine quite on hold (about 2 minutes). The thing is that > > Linux finished runnig commands about 3 times faster than FreeBSD. What > > the heck does that suppose to mean?! I thought FreeBSD whould kick linux > > butt? > > FreeBSD spawned many more processes than Linux before it started being > unable to fork and was thus running many more live copies of the program? > You haven't really given/collected enough information to decide. Linux 2.2.x still supports only 1024 processes I believe. Rumour goes that 2.4 supports 16384 processes, so poster should try a 2.3.99pre<x> kernel. P.s. this is one of the weirdest benchmarks I have ever seen :-) Marco van de Voort (MarcoV@Stack.nl) <http://www.stack.nl/~marcov/xtdlib.htm>; To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000405121137.CF1C92E804>