Microsoft has released file and web server benchmark
results which claim to show that Linux on the mainframe lags behind
Windows 2003 on Intel systems in a price-performance
comparison.Microsoft ran the benchmark tests in response
to what it believes were IBM's unsubstantiated claims about the
benefits of running Linux on its mainframe hardware.
Microsoft general manager of platform strategy
Martin Taylor said, "IBM was making claims and customers were
trying to figure things out and didn't have the facts in front of
them."
The benchmark results contradict IBM's
contention that a z900 mainframe processor running Linux could
perform as well as three or four Intel processors running Windows
at the same clock speed, Taylor claimed
"One Linux image on one zSeries CPU performed
at about the same as Windows NT 4 on one 900MHz Intel processor.
Windows 2003 outperformed it. No question."
However, Microsoft was unable to reveal at
least one important fact relating to today's numbers: the source of
IBM's alleged claim that a z900 processor running Linux could
perform as well as three or four Intel processors running
Windows.
Microsoft maintained that IBM sales staff were
making that claim to customers, but was unable to provide any
evidence of this. An IBM spokesman contacted about the issue knew
nothing about this specific claim.
One industry observer welcomed Microsoft's
benchmark numbers. "Microsoft has made a genuine contribution,"
said Rudy de Haas, an IT consultant who has written about Linux's
performance on the mainframe under the pseudonym Paul Murphy.
De Haas has criticised IBM in the past for not
providing information on Linux's mainframe performance. "There are
several things you could use to raise questions about what
Microsoft did, but the real bottom line is that no one else has
done it," , he said.
The reason Linux mainframe benchmarks are so
scarce is that they simply may not matter to customers, according
to IDC analyst Dan Kusnetzky.
"The bigger question is, why would people
consider putting Linux on the mainframe? Performance might be a
secondary or tertiary issue," he said. "It may be an attempt to
lower the cost of maintenance, and the raw performance may have
been good enough for the task at hand."
An IBM spokesman said, "We typically don't run
industry standard performance benchmarks for any software on the
mainframe. The value of the mainframe is based on its ability to
securely run multiple applications on a single platform as opposed
to purely seeking outstanding performance of one application on a
single platform."
Microsoft's benchmarks were conducted by the
Veritest division of Lionbridge Technologies under contract to
Microsoft. They can be found at
http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/microsoft/ms_performance_updated.pdf
Robert McMillan writes for IDG News Service