Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 00:00:13 -0700 (PDT) From: rick hamell <hamellr@dsinw.com> To: drkhoe@gmsnet.com Cc: Michael Slater <mikey@iexpress.net.au>, "'freebsd-questions@freebsd.org'" <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Fact or Fiction (Unix vs NT) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.990414235631.5562F-100000@dsinw.com> In-Reply-To: <199904150654.XAA23108@gms.gmsnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> That means it would fire up potentially 290 spare threads for each > request, in effect throttling Linux's kernel... > > This puts their whole Linux/Unix know how in doubt, also, they claim Linux > only used 960megs of the 4gigs of RAM, when a kernel recompile could've fixed > the problem. I doubt if they understood the effective use of swap space > either... I've seen that exact report before... it's been critized multiple times for having a Linux server that was configured in such a way to decrease it's effectiveness... It's defiantly a propoganda piece, aimed at the uneducated. 'Look a stock NT configuration beats a Linux configuration that we crippled on purpose because Microsoft contributed a lot of money to us!' Rick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.990414235631.5562F-100000>