[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Why Linux, Why Debian

On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 03:33:09PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 07:45, Philip Brown <phil@bolthole.com> wrote:
> > If someone is specifically interested in
> > "how does solaris compare with linux", I would suggest finding a SCSI-based
> > x86 machine, and doing the comparison on that box.
> Why SCSI?  For the same money IDE will significantly outperform SCSI.  One of 
> the advantages of x86 systems is that you can use cheap IDE disks instead of 
> expensive SCSI disks.

Because solaris's IDE drivers are somewhat hacky. If you do the comparison
on an IDE sytem, you will most likely end up comparing how sucky solaris's
IDE drivers are to linux, as opposed to comparing the two kernels in

Unless you want to do the legwork of tracking down a system that is
specifically intel ATA-33 only. That may be semi-comparable.
MAYBE ATA-66 is reasonable as well, with solaris 9 x86. Not sure.

> > (or contrariwise, running sparclinux vs sparc/solaris, of course)
> ssh is significantly slower on SPARC Linux than on SPARC/Solaris or Intel.  
> Something about the optimisation of the crypto code.  While there are issues 
> like that it's difficult to do good tests for comparing machines.

errr.. that sounds rather odd. Surely, using gcc x.y.z on sparc linux,
should result in pretty much the same optimization as on sparc solaris,
when it comes to user-level code.

Are you suggesting that there is a known problem with gcc+sparc linux,
or that it is a known kernel problem with sparc linux?

Or just that the solaris sparc kernel interfaces are better optimized for
64bit operations than sparc linux?

Reply to: