Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 17 Aug 2002 14:23:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 17 Aug 2002 14:23:16 -0400 Received: from mail.zmailer.org ([62.240.94.4]:50105 "EHLO mail.zmailer.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 17 Aug 2002 14:23:16 -0400 Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 21:27:15 +0300 From: Matti Aarnio To: Dax Kelson Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Does Solaris really scale this well? Message-ID: <20020817182715.GC32427@mea-ext.zmailer.org> References:

Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 883 Lines: 22 On Sat, Aug 17, 2002 at 11:53:16AM -0600, Dax Kelson wrote: > From: > http://www.itworld.com/Man/3828/020816mcnealy/ > > Scott McNealy: > > "When you take a 99-way UltraSPARC III machine and add a 100th processor, > you get 94 percent linear scalability. You can't get 94 percent linear > scalability on your first Intel chip. It's very, very hard to do, and they > have not done it." Conditionally... I would like to know the exact architecture, and the problem set running in the system to say. When you have noncc-NUMA, you have a Beowulf-like setup. when you have cc-NUMA ("cc" = cache coherent), things get truly hairy... - 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/