* DFS peremptorily fired off this memo:
> Linonut wrote:
>
>>> http://mediakey.dk/~cc/tomcat-performance-linux-faster-than-windows/
>>
>> At last, a comparison that at least uses a scatter plot.
>>
>> That Error/Second plot is pretty incredible. How can Windows (or any
>> OS) cause a service to have such an incredible error rate?
>
> Read the full story and you'll have a more balanced view than Lying Spamming
> Idiot provides.
>
> http://www.webperformanceinc.com/library/reports/windows_vs_linux_part1/index.html
When our servlet found itself hitting memory limits of the app
server, the platforms had an opportunity to reveal different error
handling techniques. Linux maintained it's lead over it's Windows
counterpart, except when it was forced to deal with the memory
shortage.
> http://www.webperformanceinc.com/library/reports/windows_vs_linux_part2/index.html
>
> Plus, the tests were run using the very minimum Windows Server 2003 memory
> requirement of 512mb.
What? This fellow used the Microsoft/Mindcraft gambit? Heavens!
> No reputable organization would rely on such a paltry
> Windows machine when expecting a thousand http hits per second.
Yet it was just fine for a Linux box. That tells ya somethin'. Of
course, note the quote above, where Linux shows a wart.
In the final analysis:
From the administrator's stand point, our Linux server did not tie up
it's CPU resources as early, and was able to service many more
connections overall. However, some of those connections were
consistently delayed, leaving users waiting on the other end.
However, even with some normal delays in consideration, our Linux
server was still able to serve more users than it's Windows
counterpart.
--
All the really good ideas I ever had came to me while I was milking a cow.
-- Grant Wood
|
|
