It's not almost identical hardware and software is different too.
Originally Posted by kebabbert
No one objects when Linux is faster ("ah, such a good and fair benchmark".
A sane person can't say Linux scales worse basing on SAP papers you posted and this is one of the reasons you're an idiot to me.
But when Linux is slower on, e.g., SAP benhcmarks, there are people questioning the SAP benchmark.
I see there's really something wrong with you.
("no, this can not be right, something is wrong with the benchmark")
This is exactly what you're doing here. You're showing two different papers with two different servers and you say Solaris scales better and you don't want to admit it's not fair. You're also accusing others exactly what you're doing.
I think this is not really fair, but hey, since when has Linux supporters been fair? They compare 800 MHz SPARC to 2.4GHz Intel Core Duo and thinks that is fair. If I question that, they insist it is fair. Only one year later, they MAY admit it was not fair. But maybe not.
This "stupid stupid stupid SAP benchmark" didn't benchmark Linux and Solaris, but two different servers. Phoronix benchmarks systems using their stock configurations (usually) and this is quite fair. Of course you can install newer packages, tweak some things etc. and results will be different. You will accept defaults are tested or you can cry like a baby.
Linus lags behind - demand a full investigation with full debug information and dont accept this benchmark. "Something must be wrong, I refuse to accept this stupid stupid stupid SAP benchmark."
It's you who's not fair. You gave Bonwick (a SUN developer) PR talk to backup your claims, two different SAP papers which you treat like an OS benchmark etc.
I still think Linux supporters are not fair, but that is the way life is: not fair. Nothing to do, just accept it.
You said in one of your comments something like: Linux is known it doesn't scale well. I can say Solaris is known of being slow thus the name Slowlaris.