Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 17 Aug 2002 21:42:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 17 Aug 2002 21:42:11 -0400 Received: from cibs9.sns.it ([192.167.206.29]:53776 "EHLO cibs9.sns.it") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 17 Aug 2002 21:42:10 -0400 Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 03:46:07 +0200 (CEST) From: venom@sns.it To: Dax Kelson cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Does Solaris really scale this well? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 896 Lines: 30 On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Dax Kelson wrote: > Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 11:53:16 -0600 (MDT) > From: Dax Kelson > To: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" > Subject: Does Solaris really scale this well? > > > 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." you can't get 94% linear scalability also on Sparc III, to say the truth... - 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/