Re: Linux/Windows Universal Benchmark
* Shri Shrikumar (shri@urbyte.com) spake thusly:
> > No, of course not. Different systems do different things well and
> > poorly. For example: Write a "benchmark" that starts and stops 10,000
> > processes and Linux will beat Windows hands-down. Write a "benchmark"
> > that starts and stops 10,000 threads and Windows will beat Linux
> > hands-down (if it's not still running the process benchmark...).
>
> Ummmm.... out of curiosity, Why / how does windows beat Linux ? Is it
> technically very difficult / impossible to have an OS that does
> processes and threads very fast or has Linux CHOSEN to give more
> importance to processes than to threads and why ?
Because... errm, do a university-level OS course.
Unix is a time-sharing system, which means it is geared up for
running multiple processes, and give each of these processes
decent interactive performance. This way a university can give
each student a terminal running vi, and none of them has to wait
10 minutes for their keystrokes to get processed. So in a sense
yes, Linux chose to be that way. Or, rather, Berkeley chose to
make Unix that way. Oh, and threads didn't exist back then IIRC.
Dima
--
Q276304 - Error Message: Your Password Must Be at Least 18770 Characters
and Cannot Repeat Any of Your Previous 30689 Passwords -- RISKS 21.37
Reply to: