--------------E880EB62FB2F9CD435BFB629
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Return-Path: <Matthew.Wilcox@genedata.com>
Received: from mail.core.genedata.com (mentolat-e0.core.genedata.com [157.161.173.16])
by email.netpage.com.hk (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00111
for <steveu@netpage.com.hk>; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 19:38:57 +0800
Received: from relay.ch.genedata.com (pinatubo-e0.ch.genedata.com [157.161.173.48])
by mail.core.genedata.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA30350
for <steveu@netpage.com.hk>; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:38:53 +0200
Received: from mencheca.ch.genedata.com (root@mencheca.ch.genedata.com [157.161.173.82])
by relay.ch.genedata.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA3142643
for <steveu@netpage.com.hk>; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:38:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by genedata.com
via sendmail from stdin
id <m10yZkT-00025cC@mencheca.ch.genedata.com> (Debian Smail3.2.0.102)
for steveu@netpage.com.hk; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:38:53 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:38:53 +0200
From: Matthew Wilcox <Matthew.Wilcox@genedata.com>
To: Steve Underwood <steveu@netpage.com.hk>
Subject: Re: FTP benchmark proposal
Message-ID: <19990628133853.A30362@mencheca.ch.genedata.com>
References: <199906272035.NAA00807@lm.bitmover.com> <199906280047.KAA22976@vindaloo.atnf.CSIRO.AU> <19990628122932.N30370@mencheca.ch.genedata.com> <37775B6F.6FE7F154@netpage.com.hk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.3i
In-Reply-To: <37775B6F.6FE7F154@netpage.com.hk>; from Steve Underwood on Mon, Jun 28, 1999 at 11:24:31AM +0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
On Mon, Jun 28, 1999 at 11:24:31AM +0000, Steve Underwood wrote:
> > > I'd also suggest that the server be set up with multiple 100 Mb cards
> > > (aka the Mindcraft test).
> >
> > [i've taken the liberty of correcting the name, as you yourself pointed
> > out later]
> >
> > Why do you suggest that? One gigabit network card is cheaper than 4
> > hundred megabit cards and provides more bandwidth. One of the reasons
> > the Mindcraft benchmarketing exercise was so poor.
>
> If you run benchmark tests with GB Ethernet you loose any right to complain
> about unrealistic benchmarks that others might create. A machine with 4 x 100MB
> Ethernet cards is a common real world configuration - often more for redundancy
> than actual throughput. How many people have GB Ethernet installed, or will do
> so in the next 12 months?
if it's for redundancy then why bench it for performance? If you're
setting up a high performance server then you choose the hardware
configuration which matches the system you want to run. Like cdrom.com
do for example. They use a single gigabit network card for FreeBSD.
> Also tell me where I can get a GB Ethernet card for US$70. I can get 4 x 100Mbps
> high performance Tulip compatible cards for that. Also where could I get a GB
> hub for less than 4 times a 100MB hub?
Where can you get a Tulip card for $17.50? I would love to buy a box.
-- Matthew Wilcox <willy@bofh.ai> "Windows and MacOS are products, contrived by engineers in the service of specific companies. Unix, by contrast, is not so much a product as it is a painstakingly compiled oral history of the hacker subculture." - N Stephenson--------------E880EB62FB2F9CD435BFB629--
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/