Re: How fast is your server?

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2002


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 41863
interpreted = N
texte = Its a fair enough comment that the two platforms may not account for a 'tick' in the same way but the fact remains that the PC is visibly faster than the Mac. Its something that can be measured by counting in your head...I love mac's but I also love money and seen as how here in new zealand you can buy 6 PC's for the price of an Xserve, the Xserve is already at a big disadvantage.I would be interested in a proper test also as Aaron has sugested.I will try and device some better coding challenges to test later on tonight...Unless smith micro has something it can share?On 24/7/02 1:27 AM, John Peacock wrote:> Andrew Simpson wrote: >> >> The PC completed this task in 243 ticks while the mac took 637 ticks. > > Ticks on PC != Ticks on Mac > > The underlying operating system measures time in different ways; I believe on > the Mac, a tick is 1/8 of a second, whereas on a PC it is 100 milliseconds > (0.1 > second). So you are not measuring the same thing. > > That being said, the disk processing time of writing 20000 times to a file is > likely going to swamp any other variable (milliseconds vs nanoseconds). It > will > vary by O/S (classic Mac is not tuned as a server O/S), RAM, disk subsystem > (caching controller), and disk geometry itself. I don't think this test can > measure anything useful, unless you use the same box and vary some of the > parameters (add RAM, use a caching controller, use a 10k disk drive). > > John-- Andrew Simpson Web DevelopmentBlackpepper Interactive Ltd PO Box 99805 Newmarket4 Clayton Street Newmarket AucklandPh: +64 9 520-6281 Mob: 0272733270 Fax: +64 9 524-1849http://www.blackpepper.co.nz------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://search.smithmicro.com/ Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: How fast is your server? (Alain Russell 2002)
  2. Re: How fast is your server? (Alain Russell 2002)
  3. Re: How fast is your server? (Bob Minor 2002)
  4. Re: How fast is your server? (Andrew Simpson 2002)
  5. Re: How fast is your server? (Kenneth Grome 2002)
  6. Re: How fast is your server? (Andrew Simpson 2002)
  7. Re: How fast is your server? (Aaron Lynch 2002)
  8. Re: How fast is your server? (Andrew Simpson 2002)
  9. Re: How fast is your server? (John Peacock 2002)
  10. Re: How fast is your server? (Alain Russell 2002)
  11. Re: How fast is your server? (Aaron Lynch 2002)
  12. Re: How fast is your server? (Aaron Lynch 2002)
  13. Re: How fast is your server? (Andrew Simpson 2002)
  14. Re: How fast is your server? (Aaron Lynch 2002)
  15. How fast is your server? (Andrew Simpson 2002)
Its a fair enough comment that the two platforms may not account for a 'tick' in the same way but the fact remains that the PC is visibly faster than the Mac. Its something that can be measured by counting in your head...I love mac's but I also love money and seen as how here in new zealand you can buy 6 PC's for the price of an Xserve, the Xserve is already at a big disadvantage.I would be interested in a proper test also as Aaron has sugested.I will try and device some better coding challenges to test later on tonight...Unless smith micro has something it can share?On 24/7/02 1:27 AM, John Peacock wrote:> Andrew Simpson wrote: >> >> The PC completed this task in 243 ticks while the mac took 637 ticks. > > Ticks on PC != Ticks on Mac > > The underlying operating system measures time in different ways; I believe on > the Mac, a tick is 1/8 of a second, whereas on a PC it is 100 milliseconds > (0.1 > second). So you are not measuring the same thing. > > That being said, the disk processing time of writing 20000 times to a file is > likely going to swamp any other variable (milliseconds vs nanoseconds). It > will > vary by O/S (classic Mac is not tuned as a server O/S), RAM, disk subsystem > (caching controller), and disk geometry itself. I don't think this test can > measure anything useful, unless you use the same box and vary some of the > parameters (add RAM, use a caching controller, use a 10k disk drive). > > John-- Andrew Simpson Web DevelopmentBlackpepper Interactive Ltd PO Box 99805 Newmarket4 Clayton Street Newmarket AucklandPh: +64 9 520-6281 Mob: 0272733270 Fax: +64 9 524-1849http://www.blackpepper.co.nz------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://search.smithmicro.com/ Andrew Simpson

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

please unsubscribe me! (2000) database files in secure folder (1997) Searching multiple fields from one form field (1997) select multiple (1997) showif field is number (1997) Safari browser and WebDNA set-cookies (2003) WebCat2b13MacPlugIn - [showif][search][/showif] (1997) U&P IIS concept (1998) WebCatalog can't find database (1997) Mimeheaders parameters, which exist? (2003) system crashes, event log (1997) 2nd WebCatalog2 Feature Request (1996) Special delete ... (1997) Emailer help....! (1997) [cart] number range ?? (2001) Field Problem (2000) bug in [SendMail] (1997) webcatalog and webmerchant 2.1 (1998) Linux [decrypt] bug exists only on webcat 3 or also 4? (2000) What am I missing (1997)