When I ping localhost vs the default gateway, I get a ping time of 10 times better. Just that alone would account for some of the 10 fold problems with windows vs Linux for the rapid fire tests.

As for the download time, when did it take you to download ANY web page 120 seconds? 2 minutes on a web page? That sounds like a timeout from misconfiguration, not any Linux server I’ve ever used. Maybe they set things up to grab the wrong script or talk to the wrong database (maybe not a local database, but one on the windows box)?

Uno studio di eWEEK confronta diversi stack per l’implementazione di applicazioni web, confrontando Windows con Linux. Da quanto viene pubblicato, python sotto windows è enormemente più performante di php sotto linux; tuttavia mysqlperfo…

Honestly I do not buy it Tuning of LAMP stack on Windows and Linux is at 95% same – installing PHP accelerator, using proper modules, configuring apache, MySQL Server configuration etc. Going deeper to change kernel options normally gives just few percent difference – OS vendors try to have reasonable defaults. Of course if some “WAMP in the box” which is reasonably optimized was used on Windows while stock Apache+MySQL were used on Linux it could explain the difference.

Speaking about threads… I would not expect it to be that different. MySQL also uses threads very heavily but performance is not that much different.

Well. There is nothing to argue here. We’re just poking finger in the sky until there is some kind of disclosure done.

2. “Why Python would be faster than PHP on Windows but slower on Linux ?”
Python relies heavily on OS thread performance, and on Windows it’s better than on Linux.

Overall, you’re right, this benchmark does suck bigtime.

Yes. Database comparison was pretty good, and not because MySQL sored top marks in it . If you would look at list of my concerns they were all pretty much targeted in that benchmark. It was real application which was same for all database vendors which counts as benchmark specs. It was published, so were hardware configuration and database server settings. If I’m not mistaken IBM even repeated the runs with new DB2 versions and showed they are not that bad later on.