Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S129176AbRBAV2Y>; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 16:28:24 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S129154AbRBAV2O>; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 16:28:14 -0500
Received: from raven.toyota.com ([63.87.74.200]:51206 "EHLO raven.toyota.com")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S129082AbRBAV2F>;
	Thu, 1 Feb 2001 16:28:05 -0500
Message-ID: <3A79D4DF.E1D0B984@toyota.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:28:00 -0800
From: J Sloan <jjs@toyota.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.1 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gregory Maxwell <greg@linuxpower.cx>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: NT soon to surpass Linux in specweb99 performance?
In-Reply-To: <20010201143825.A21237@xi.linuxpower.cx>
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

Gregory Maxwell wrote:

> Looks like TUX caught MS's attention:
> http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/results/res2000q4/web99-20001211-00082.html
>
> Anyone know if their method of achieveing this is as flexible as TUX, or is
> their "SWC 3.0" simply mean 'spec web cheat' and involve implimenting the
> specweb dyanmic stuff in x86 assembly in their microkernel? :)

One might say they cheated, both by using much faster
disks and more of them, and "supercharging" their web
server by putting a web cache in front of iis. Even so,
they couldn't quite catch up to Tux.

jjs

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/