On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 09:35, Calvin Austin wrote: > > NPTL does NOT provide better performances for Java. It only (but > > that's VERY valuable) provides MUCH BETTER reliability. > > Linux 2.4 is far from being an industrial O.S. for heavy load. > > Waiting for 2.6 to see how much progress has been done. > > Ok so where is your benchmark for NPTL? How can we trust you? Why all the info about > AIX, that can't even run on the same machine as windows 2000 or linux x86? > > For the record I showed a NPTL benchmark at Javaone which showed improved > performance and > scalability. And this is only the first cut at NPTL on Redhat 9 > > The benchmark had 191% speed on a dual machine between running 1.4.1 and 1.4.2 with > NPTL > on the exact same machine. It was a heavy threaded chat server
I would second this with my own experiences with C++, as well as some of the benchmarks used to demonstrated the goodness of NPTL by the NPTL developers. Sure, for code that doesn't spawn many threads, and doesn't synchronize very much, the benefit of NPTL is more in terms of the better POSIX compliance (which in many ways translates to better stability since POSIX semantics are more likely to be well understood by programmers). However, for code who's primary bottlnecks were in Linux's thread library, you will definitely see huge performance wins. --Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
