| To: | Steve Alexander <sca@refugee.engr.sgi.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Linux: the next step |
| From: | Bob English <renglish@ratliff.engr.sgi.com> |
| Date: | Mon, 12 Aug 96 14:24:15 -0700 |
| Cc: | Bob English <renglish@ratliff.engr.sgi.com>, lm@gate1-neteng.engr.sgi.com (Larry McVoy), Nigel Gamble <nigel@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com>, Alistair Lambie <alambie@wellington.sgi.com>, ariel@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com, linux@yon.engr.sgi.com, renglish@ratliff.engr.sgi.com |
| In-reply-to: | Your message of "Mon, 12 Aug 96 14:18:18 PDT." <199608122118.OAA18053@refugee.engr.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com |
In message <199608122118.OAA18053@refugee.engr.sgi.com> you write: >If I look at those benchmarks, they'll probably run faster on Linux on an Indy >than they do on IRIX on an Indy, so I doubt the locking is the big problem we >need to be looking at. I don't have numbers from David to quote, so maybe I'm >wrong. I'd like to be wrong. I was comparing Irix MP times vs. Irix UP times, and the difference is both substantial and locking related. Of course, if Irix were as efficient on a UP as Linux, the difference might be a factor of 10 rather than a factor of 2 :-). --bob-- |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Linux: the next step, Steve Alexander |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Linux: the next step, Sandeep Cariapa |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Linux: the next step, Steve Alexander |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Linux: the next step, Steve Alexander |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |