3 ms·
What you're saying makes sense to me, but do you have a citation for Plan9 being notably slower than Linux on equivalent hardware? Seems like it'd be trivially
by supersillyus 16y ago
What you're saying makes sense to me, but do you have a citation for Plan9 being notably slower than Linux on equivalent hardware? Seems like it'd be trivially true unless there is a fantastic architectural advantage to plan9 somewhere, but I'd love to see some numbers.
- mhd 16y agoIt's been a while since I lurked on 9fans (after all the late adopting minimalist tiling window manager fanboys started coming in in droves), so I can't give you any links to recent comparisons. First of all, the comparison would be pretty unscientific if you include all the different variables. So let's say you want to test common server performance, then you'd probably do something like an apache bench for a web server. Now comes the problem: Apart from the kernel issues (memory management, ethernet driver, scheduling), you'll have different web servers, compiled with different C compilers. The GCC port for Plan 9 is ancient, and I'm not aware that e.g. Apache is running on it. Yes, you can simply test page loads/second with any technology available to any platform, and if you buy into the fact that everything you're doing is wrong (so not just Plan 9 vs Linux, but also gcc vs. 8c, apache vs pegasus etc.), well…