*BSD News Article 78620


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.uwa.edu.au!disco.iinet.net.au!wa.news.telstra.net!act.news.telstra.net!psgrain!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail
From: brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk (Brian Somers)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.infosystems.www.misc
Subject: Re: Unix too slow for a Web server?
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.infosystems.www.misc
Date: 18 Sep 1996 14:48:55 +0100
Organization: Coverform Ltd.
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <51ouk7$hv@anorak.coverform.lan>
References: <323ED0BD.222CA97F@pobox.com> <323F123D.6D55@www.play-hookey.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.coverform.lan
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: awfulhak.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:130121 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:27541 comp.infosystems.www.misc:43789

Ken Bigelow (kbigelow@www.play-hookey.com) wrote:
[rubbish deleted]

: I will refrain from uttering the plain-language content of my real
: opinion of such a claim. Let's just leave it at this: I'm running Apache
: 1.1.1 on a FreeBSD 2.1R platform, and even when my site is being
: accessed top reports the CPU capacity is largely idle. The server
: machine is currently using a 486DX-50. I plan to upgrade to an AMD
: 5x86DX-133, which overclocks very nicely to 160 MHz (too bad it won't do
: 200, but what do you want? Egg in your beer?), but there seems little
: need to hurry; the box outspeeds the phone line with my present
: connection, and I can't afford an ISDN link or better until I go
: commercial (which will be yet awhile).

I tried overclocking my AMD 133 to 160 running FreeBSD.  It ran for
several hours, clitched (missed some info from a SCSI tape read), recovered
by just missing a single file, ran for a while (another 8-9 hours) then
hung - dead as a post.

Unfortunately, I was comparing this chip to a P24T at the time, and the
P24T won easily.  The AMD-133 goes to my mother on the 28th.

--
Brian <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....