From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 6060 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2023 20:09:44 -0000
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 9 Mar 2023 20:09:44 -0000
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC7AF4128E;
	Fri, 10 Mar 2023 06:09:41 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from mcvoy.com (mcvoy.com [192.169.23.250])
	by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F8E940A7D
	for <coff@tuhs.org>; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 06:09:33 +1000 (AEST)
Received: by mcvoy.com (Postfix, from userid 3546)
	id B803035E603; Thu,  9 Mar 2023 12:09:32 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 12:09:32 -0800
From: Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com>
To: Dan Cross <crossd@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20230309200932.GK9225@mcvoy.com>
References: <CAP6exY+05fStBtpZGd2HeeNf21fNXeKUTwBV0h5-1YczwF+tew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEoi9W4nMjhXvv0zeQViWwuR=PYN7eJCto_Y8W_VRqzfM0-p7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD2gp_R=uqX4VidxTik8d1L-KYSsp4KwdMSFXx2kJdrCJ6ojbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEoi9W7WWJbj-OTF2as-RK2ZZUeOugZ=MDnbdEJ7v_i7RGAcGg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEoi9W7WWJbj-OTF2as-RK2ZZUeOugZ=MDnbdEJ7v_i7RGAcGg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Message-ID-Hash: TFOK3FEKACVHC6DCCNRUZO52RHTKNXSN
X-Message-ID-Hash: TFOK3FEKACVHC6DCCNRUZO52RHTKNXSN
X-MailFrom: lm@mcvoy.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>, COFF <coff@tuhs.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1
Precedence: list
Subject: [COFF] Re: [TUHS] Re: the wheel of reincarnation goes sideways
List-Id: Computer Old Farts Forum <coff.tuhs.org>
Archived-At: <https://www.tuhs.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/coff@tuhs.org/message/TFOK3FEKACVHC6DCCNRUZO52RHTKNXSN/>
List-Archive: <https://www.tuhs.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/coff@tuhs.org/>
List-Help: <mailto:coff-request@tuhs.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:coff-owner@tuhs.org>
List-Post: <mailto:coff@tuhs.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:coff-join@tuhs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:coff-leave@tuhs.org>

On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 02:55:44PM -0500, Dan Cross wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 8:22???PM John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 2:53???PM Dan Cross <crossd@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> But the
> >> 3090 was really more like a distributed system than the Athlon box
> >> was, with all sorts of offload capabilities. For that matter, a
> >> thousand users probably _could_ telnet into the Athlon system. With
> >> telnet in line mode, it'd probably even be decently responsive.
> >
> > I find that difficult to believe.  It seems too high by an order of magnitude.
> 
> I'm not going to claim it would be zippy, but I do think it would work
> acceptably.
> 
> Suppose that 1000 users telnet'ed into the x86 machine, but remained
> essentially idle; what resources would that consume? We'd have 1000
> open TCP connections, a thousand shell processes, a thousand
> telnetd's, etc. 

The early Unix code really did not like stuff like this.  Lots of linear
scans through what were assumed to be short lists.  I still remember an
SGI Challenge being brought to it's knees by a bunch of racks of modems.
The same machine could move a ton of data but not when it was being
forced through a zillion sockets.

Linux seems well past that problem but it's possible that back in the
Athlon days it still sucked.  I pinged Linus, if he remembers when the
kernel got taught to scale on sockets I'll report back.

--lm