10 Mar
2023
10 Mar
'23
2:09 a.m.
On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 02:55:44PM -0500, Dan Cross wrote:
On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 8:22???PM John Cowan
<cowan(a)ccil.org> wrote:
The early Unix code really did not like stuff like this. Lots of linear
scans through what were assumed to be short lists. I still remember an
SGI Challenge being brought to it's knees by a bunch of racks of modems.
The same machine could move a ton of data but not when it was being
forced through a zillion sockets.
Linux seems well past that problem but it's possible that back in the
Athlon days it still sucked. I pinged Linus, if he remembers when the
kernel got taught to scale on sockets I'll report back.
--lm
On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 2:53???PM Dan Cross
<crossd(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm not going to claim it would be zippy, but I do think it would work
acceptably.
Suppose that 1000 users telnet'ed into the x86 machine, but remained
essentially idle; what resources would that consume? We'd have 1000
open TCP connections, a thousand shell processes, a thousand
telnetd's, etc. But the
3090 was really more like a distributed system than the Athlon box
was, with all sorts of offload capabilities. For that matter, a
thousand users probably _could_ telnet into the Athlon system. With
telnet in line mode, it'd probably even be decently responsive.
I find that difficult to believe. It seems too high by an order of magnitude.