Interactive 2.2 problems
Ray Shwake
shwake at raysnec.UUCP
Wed Jul 11 06:09:02 AEST 1990
In article <384 at denwa.uucp> jimmy at denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) writes:
>
>After posting my recent impression of Interactive 2.2 being horribly
>slow, I decided to do a simple unofficial comparison between 2.2 and
>2.0.2.
But then again... I installed 2.2 last week on a system horribly
limited (memory-wise) - 2 (two) MB 32-bit, 2 (two) MB 16-bit. Ran
the BENCH program, source for which appeared in Unix/World,
February 1989. Using the examples, one forks five processes, each
of which writes 1000 512-byte blocks, or forks twenty processes,
each of which writes 200 512-byte blocks.
Each test ran from forks to completion in less than 15 seconds,
which is somewhat faster than it ran under 2.0.2, notably faster
than SCO Xenix on the same system and SCO UNIX on my office system.
(What? You want numbers? You want details? Hey, this isn't going
into the ACM Journal!)
But then, I'm the guy who wrote an article years ago questioning
whether benchmarks REALLY indicated what they claimed to indicate.
The only conclusions I've drawn to date are: 1) ISC's Fast File
System is a genuine enhancement; and 2) ISC 2.2 is somewhat faster
than 2.0.2 in disk performance, though it takes somewhat more memory.
More information about the Comp.unix.i386
mailing list