Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S129458AbRCAB2l>; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:28:41 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S129486AbRCAB2e>; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:28:34 -0500
Received: from zeus.kernel.org ([209.10.41.242]:51676 "EHLO zeus.kernel.org")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S129438AbRCAB2T>;
	Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:28:19 -0500
Message-ID: <3A9D891C.434E3AA7@namesys.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 02:26:20 +0300
From: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
Organization: Namesys
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en, ru
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: What is 2.4 Linux networking performance like compared to BSD?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

I have a client that wants to implement a webcache, but is very leery of
implementing it on Linux rather than BSD.

They know that iMimic's polymix performance on Linux 2.2.* is half what it is on
BSD.  Has the Linux 2.4 networking code caught up to BSD?

Can I tell them not to worry about the Linux networking code strangling their
webcache product's performance, or not?

Hans
-
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/