Linux/Samba vs NT

[Michael Kohne]

At 04:53 PM 1/29/99 +1100, Tom Holroyd wrote:
>I was having a discussion with a MS person about the performance of NT.
>I got this reply:
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
>By the way, I looked into that claim that Linux could outperform NT server,
>and my source claimed that the test was done on different hardware (i.e. it
>was rigged) and that Linux still loses to NT on equivalent HW, although "it
>has gotten closer."  Do you have a reference to a particular test that
>showed otherwise?
>
>---------------------------------------
>
>The reference is the claim that Linux with Samba can serve files faster
>than an NT server.  Samba's web page says they are fast, but a) on high
>end hardware that NT doesn't run on and b) it wasn't Linux.
>
>References that show Linux/Samba to be faster than NT on the same hardware
>would be appreciated.
>
>Dr. Tom Holroyd
>I would dance and be merry,
>Life would be a ding-a-derry,
>If I only had a brain.
>	-- The Scarecrow
> 
Just came across one:

http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/issue/0%2C4537%2C387506%2C00.html

They installed several different linux distributions and NT on identical
hardware, letting each do it's own hardware discovery, and NOT tweaking any
of them for speed. At very light loads (< 12 clients) NT was a bit better,
but once you hit 12 clients, all the linux distribs beat the heck out of NT.

Good luck!

Michael Kohne
mhkohne at discordia.org
"The apocalypse: it's not just for religious extremists anymore."