Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 15:52:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 15:52:13 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:63367 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 15:52:13 -0400 Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 12:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20020906.124936.34476547.davem@redhat.com> To: gh@us.ibm.com Cc: Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com, hadi@cyberus.ca, tcw@tempest.prismnet.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, niv@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000 From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: References: <20020906.115804.109349169.davem@redhat.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 879 Lines: 18 From: Gerrit Huizenga Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 12:52:15 -0700 So if apache were using a listen()/clone()/accept()/exec() combo rather than a full listen()/fork()/exec() model it would see most of the same benefits? Apache would need to do some more, such as do something about cpu affinity and do the non-blocking VFS tricks Tux does too. To be honest, I'm not going to sit here all day long and explain how Tux works. I'm not even too knowledgable about the precise details of it's implementation. Besides, the code is freely available and not too complex, so you can go have a look for yourself :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/