Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD/Alpha SMP fully multiuser stable and checked in
David O'Brien writes "
FreeBSD SMP on Alpha processors is now stable and has been checked into
CVS repository on the development branch (5.0-CURRENT). John Baldwin, Andrew Gallatin, and Doug Rabson first booted single-user SMP on Friday, April 13th, and full multi-user support followed on Tuesday, April 17th. The code was stablized and then checked into the CVS repository on Friday, April 27th. Since being checking into the repository, it has been verified to work on quad-CPU DEC AlphaServer 4100s, dual-CPU Compaq DS-20s, dual-CPU API UP2000, and dual-CPU DEC AlphaServer 2100s.
"
I know this sounds like flame bait, but I'm sick of the FreeBSD advocates claiming that they are faster than Linux when it comes to network servers. If that's true, where are the numbers to prove it? I want to see SpecWeb results!
I don't have specweb results. I don't care about specweb. Further, I do not agree with you that it is an adequate test of network serving performance.
Here is a real-life, well set-up and functioning test - posted on slashdot weeks ago. Please note that the "primitave" FreeBSD 4.2 SMP _still_ outperforms linux 2.4 - and it's going to be disgusting about 3 months after 5.0-RELEASE, when the thing matures.
benchmark here
If you don't believe the results, set up a test like that on your own hardware, and experiance the fact that linux is playing "follow the leader" first hand.
Hmmm...
You prefer a byte.com self described opinion column over industry standard benchmarks...
No comment.
Well, i can show you real world performance...
We run probably the second biggest cluster of FreeBSD servers in the world, second to yahoo. And trust me, in our internal test, with standard 2cpu, 2HD servers, the load that a Customized FreeBSD install could handle was anywhere from 1.3-2 times the load a 2.4 machine could under stress.
And this was using plain old FFS and no softupdates. Even with linux's stupid async mounts, FreeBSD still mopped the floor.
no specweb benchmarks on FreeBSD mean nothing. To those who know, it will still be the performance champion for load intensive and clusterable applications.
I talk from experience, not out of my ass like you.
My opinions are my opinions, deal with it!
I realize you are a troll but hey, sometimes you just have to respond.
1. FreeBSD has had excellent SMP support since 4.0.
2. The SMP subsystem has been rewritten to make it even more efficient.
3. Arguing that FreeBSD doesn't run well on the Alpha is like arguing that Linux does not run well on the DreamCast. The Alpha release is still in development and there are still some problems with it. (Check out DEC hardware sometime... It is definitely not the nicest platform to develop for).
The simple fact is that some of us like FreeBSD a lot more than Linux. The fact that we have actually run both operating systems for extensive periods of time, and you have not, really should not matter should it?
The day linux has anything as sensible as the ports tree, softupdates, cvsup, make world, etc. give me a call. Until then I am not interested.
I, for one, got tired of moving from one linux system to another and having to search all over to figure out where a particular distribution put all of the critical files. For example, does it use sys-v style rc.d runlevel scripts or does it use BSD style rc scripts? Where does it stick particular programs? Slackware is as different from Debian as BSD is from Solaris.
Also, ever note how the FreeBSD folks seem to have all the cool drivers before the Linux people? Why do you think that is? FreeBSD had working I2O support in 3.5. Linux _still_ does not have a sensible I2O subsystem. FreeBSD had USB way before Linux did.
Not to mention, all of the projects the FreeBSD team is working on always seem to grow out of research papers, whereas the Linux projects seem to lack the same direction
-sirket
Mindcraft did an industry standard benchmark.
And, there was much whining and knashing of teeth over their results.
Still no comment?
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
I've run FreeBSD on three different AMD boxes. I've had nothing but success.
Funny story... Windows wont even run on my k6-2 400 without being patched. It doesnt correctly share interrupts on the FIC-2013+ motherboard. Guess what... Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD cause no problem. I was so proud that I found a motherboard that wasnt 'supported' by Win98.
Kan jeg få en pils, vær så snill?
I'd love to see OpenBSD go SMP in the near future but I really doubt it. Look at the recent /. interview with TdR. He doesn't seem to consider this an important project goal. There are probably other more pressing issues with OpenBSD (such as a more updated X11) but it's a shame we won't be seeing SMP integrated into this great os anytime soon.
The state is the great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everybody else. ~F. Bastiat
My guess is that your motherboard is either bad quality, or perhaps needing a decent BIOS update. Another candidate could be your RAM. I once had problems with an old Asus SC-200 SCSI controller, that was not up to the task with faster systems anymore. Overclocking is a bad idea as well.
"thou" ? Hahahhahaha you are the moron. The correct word is "thee" because you are using an objective pronoun, not a subjective pronoun. Thou art stupid. I art less stupid than thee.
Considering I develop and maintain the GCC/Binutils toolchain on AMD K6 machines, I can say absolutely this is false. You may easily have a HW problem. I would bring this up in one of the FreeBSD mailing lists to help determine what your problem is. I will note, I had to increase the voltage on one of my K6-2/450 machines by 0.1v, other wise it would SIG 11 as you mention. `make world' really stresses a machine and if your mobo just isn't keeping the volage up, you will have problems.
-- David
No code is being replaced. They're not merging the BSD/OS 5.0 experimental kernel at all; SMPng is based off of some of the design concepts in it.
If FreeBDS 5.0 really does get an "entirely overhauled SMP structure" in six months, then it will be just that: immature code that's only been around a few months.
*BSD tests it first before releasing it. It makes more sense then to throw it to the public. When was the last time a *BSD had an ontime release?
If FreeBSD's TCP/IP is so kewl, then why doesn't anyone submit SPECweb benchmarks using FreeBSD for the 1 CPU category? Linux wipes the floor with Solaris, AIX, Tru64, and Windows 2000.
It's not Linux thats wiping the floor, its TUX; the tiny in-kernel httpd that is designed for TRIVIAL matters. Putting the daemon inkernel is a glaring risk. It doesn't match the completeness of other userland servers like Apache.