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:

Wild WebCat 98 Contest! (1998) OT: print landscape (2003) [LOOKUP] (1997) WebTEN vs webSTAR (1998) Expiration of Carts (1997) why won't this TCPConnect/Send work? (2004) Uh...can someone help me out with the b10? (1997) Fulfillment e-mail? (1998) include bug????? (1997) WebCat name recognition (was MacFinder -- a new WebDNA website) (1998) Limiting user access to .tmpl files (1997) Great product and great job ! (1997) Emailer setup (1997) creator code (1997) WebCatalog can't find database (1997) setlineiems and UnitShip Cost (2000) [convertchars] Problem (2000) SMSI FTP - calander system (2002) Error Messages Returned to User (1997) Shopping problems with 2.1b3 acgi (1997)