Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!deccrl!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!cam-cl!news From: tdw@uk.ac.cam.cl (Tim Wilson) Newsgroups: comp.os.mach Subject: Re: The value of microbenchmarking (WAS Re: Mach RPC Throughput...) Message-ID: Date: 23 Mar 91 13:34:22 GMT References: <63274@bbn.BBN.COM> <9337@star.cs.vu.nl> <1991Mar18.155406.1320@cs.cmu.edu> Sender: news@cl.cam.ac.uk (The news facility) Followup-To: comp.os.mach Organization: University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory, UK Lines: 22 In-reply-to: af@cs.cmu.edu's message of 18 Mar 91 15:54:06 GMT In comp.os.mach article <1991Mar18.155406.1320@cs.cmu.edu> af@cs.cmu.edu (Alessandro Forin) wrote: [...] > I will only be willing to compare Mach and Amoeba seriously when I > will be able to: > 1) login from testarossa.mach.cs.cmu.edu to a machine running Amoeba > 2) compile a C program, maybe run some Lisp code > 3) send/receive mail locally > 4) locally produce a paper describing my impressions of the system > 5) come back a couple weeks later and find all my files still there [...] Isn't a comparison of UNIX emulations just as much a microbenchmark as null RPC times? Tim -- Tim Wilson Univ of Cambridge Computer Laboratory, Cambridge, UK (Not representing them) tdw@cl.cam.ac.uk ...!uunet!mcsun!ukc!cam-cl!tdw Tel: +44 223 334626