| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Windows Server 2003 better than Linux (Inquirer)Windows Server 2003 better than Linux (Inquirer)Posted May 7, 2003 5:38 UTC (Wed) by C.Gherardi (subscriber, #4233)In reply to: Windows Server 2003 better than Linux (Inquirer) by backtick Parent article: Windows Server 2003 better than Linux (Inquirer) > If you read the article and the report, you see all the benchmarks are based on exactly one thing: PEAK throughput. I was listening to Andrew Tridgells talk from LCA 2003 recently and he mentions this. Samba tries to have a good throughput in all scenarios whereas Microsoft has a peak performance and an exponential falloff as load increases. Some may find it an interesting listen. http://mirrors.uwa.edu.au/lca2003/loopback/papers/Tridge_Talk/Abstract.html
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||