From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] Performance Message-ID: <989345265.3af835f11c710@my.usask.ca> From: References: <3.0.5.32.20010508104215.01407b50@mail.real.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20010508104215.01407b50@mail.real.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 2.3.6-cvs Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 12:07:45 -0600 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9b9b0c7c-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 i have gathered a bit more data since i posted my PovRay comparison between plan9 and linux (also available from http://homepage.usask.ca/aam396/P9BL.html)... not exact numbers, but the breakdown is pretty much like: network -- linux much faster io -- linux somewhat faster, much faster when io involves screen/graphics raw cpu instruction execution -- linux and p9 are comparable, with linux being slightly ahead... now, the following i am reluctant to post, since i don't think it is very good (at least for the eyes of most of the people reading this list), but nonetheless, here is one of my milestones for the project discussed above: http://homepage.usask.ca/~aam396/milestone.txt this one is not really p9 vs Linux, but i hope it's useful andrey Quoting Fariborz 'Skip' Tavakkolian : > Are there any published performance numbers more recent than those > mentioned in 9 and net papers? Any for typical PC platforms compared > to Linux or FreeBSD? > >