Hi,

>
>in the multiclient page in the "next latency" box the Linux latency 
>value is 6 in the Win98 comparison case, and 12 in the Win2000 
>comparison. Which is right?
>
>--DOH! my fault, it's tested on different machines, perhaps it should be 
>marked better?

yes: couple of systems comparisons are generally made on different machines. See at 
http://www.grame.fr/Research/IPCBenchs/implementation.html#stations for the machines 
descriptions.

>
>Also the text for the Win98 test has a cut/paste error from the win2000 
>test.

right ! it's now correcred.

>As for Linux marketing material, was the Linux kernel low-latency 
>patched (doesn't look that way)? (not that I know if it makes any 
>difference?).
>

no low-latency patch was applied. As mentionned in the abstract, I wanted to measure 
real world performances ie performances of basic systems with no particular 
improvement or setup. However, I suspect that low latency patch will only improve the 
"busy" benchmark results as other measurements are only dependant on scheduling policy 
and context switches. But sure: it would be very interesting to get compared results 
between a kernel with and without low-latency patch. The source code is available and 
if someone makes such a bench, please, send me the results.

Dominique

>
>Regards
>/Robert
>
>
>Dominique Fober wrote:
>
>>In order to evaluate a possible important architecture change for the MidiShare
>>kernel developped at Grame (http://www.grame.fr/MidiShare/), we have measured 
>>inter processus communication (IPC) real-time performances on different operating 
>>systems, including GNU/Linux, Windows 98, 2000, NT 4.0 and MacOS X. 
>>The adopted point of view is based on a client/server model.
>>Results can be viewed and downloaded at http://www.grame.fr/Research/IPCBenchs/
>>
>>----------------------------------------------
>>Dominique Fober               <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>----------------------------------------------
>>GRAME - Centre National de Creation Musicale -
>>9 rue du Garet  69001 Lyon France
>>tel:+33 (0)4 720 737 06    fax:+33 (0)4 720 737 01
>>
>>



Reply via email to