From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jun 24 8:56:38 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from noc.demon.net (server.noc.demon.net [193.195.224.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 512AB14D37 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 08:56:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fanf@demon.net) Received: by noc.demon.net; id QAA26488; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 16:56:26 +0100 (BST) Received: from fanf.noc.demon.net(195.11.55.83) by inside.noc.demon.net via smap (3.2) id xma026441; Thu, 24 Jun 99 16:56:10 +0100 Received: from fanf by fanf.noc.demon.net with local (Exim 1.73 #2) id 10xBrD-0000S5-00; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 16:56:07 +0100 To: hackers@freebsd.org From: Tony Finch Subject: Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) In-Reply-To: <37724324.E984AFD@softweyr.com> References: <3771CBA7.4973C681@softweyr.com> Message-Id: Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 16:56:07 +0100 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Wes Peters wrote: > >Sorry to follow up on my own message, but I noted today in PCWeek >their trip back to the benchmark lab includes ripping 3 CPUs and >768M RAM out of the system, to benchmark how Linux and NT perform >on "lower-end" hardware. They also allowed the RedHat dudes to >switch to an Adaptec SCSI controller to talk to the RAID array. >How are we holding up under this "diminished" configuration? It's stupid to tune everything for performance except for the web server -- they should be using Zeus, not Apache. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch dot@dotat.at fanf@demon.net Winner, International Obfuscated C Code Competition 1998 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message