From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Oct 13 09:40:26 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA14295 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:40:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from rain.futuresouth.com (rain.futuresouth.com [198.79.79.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA14289 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:40:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from stormy@rain.futuresouth.com) Received: (from stormy@localhost) by rain.futuresouth.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04096 for questions@FreeBSD.ORG; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:40:07 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from stormy) Message-ID: <19981013114006.B287@futuresouth.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:40:06 -0500 From: Stormy Henderson To: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PC mag ref (good and bad) to FreeBSD Mail-Followup-To: questions@FreeBSD.ORG References: <199810131552.KAA16726@base486.home.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: <199810131552.KAA16726@base486.home.org>; from Dave Bodenstab on Tue, Oct 13, 1998 at 10:52:04AM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG A happy camper (Dave Bodenstab, imdave@mcs.net) once wrote... > server and make the claim "FreeBSD outperfomed Windows NT by a > sizeable margin, however, as you increase RAM, Windows NT surpasses > FreeBSD because of a cache limitation in Apache and FreeBSD". > > What "cache limitation" are they talking about? The folks on #FreeBSD had a couple opinions on this (I dunno if they are right, I'm just repeating what I heard). First, they think that at 550 transactions per second, the 10Mbs network card was getting close to saturated, so adding RAM wouldn't help any. Second, do you think the folks at PC Mag recompiled their kernel to utilize more than 64MB of RAM? I think they worded that in an ambiguous way: "WinNT surpassed FreeBSD." That's what they wanted you to read, but I think what they actually meant was, "WinNT's increase in performance with added memory surpassed FreeBSD's increase in performance with added memory." That of course just means that WinNT needed more RAM, while FreeBSD was perfectly happy with what it had. Be happy... -- http://www.futuresouth.com/~stormy/signature.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message