Slashdot Mirror
New Performance Mailing List for FreeBSD
An anonymous reader writes "FreeBSD's fast as is, but it appears that folks over there are going the extra mile to make sure that it continues to be the top dog according to this recent announcement. With 5.1 promising to have native threads and 5.1 only a few months out, it is really good to see performance being taken seriously."
FreeBSDs performance seemed to me to be quite close to say Linux 2.5 running on XFS. I couldnt tell which was better but I think both were quite close to the hardwares ability. I havent tried running many threaded apps, at least not under pressure..
I hope they dont take focus away from simplicity and robustness here. Multithreading is tricky, look at all the problems Linux had.. As a customer, I wouldnt want multithreading at all if theres any risk to the robust architecture.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
From the office of Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf :
BSD isn't dead.
(Unless you live in a cave, you will get this joke)
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
I just love BSD.
.
I used to go with Linux for everything a while back, but once you discover BSD, the ports system, IPF andPF, and the way everything is properly packaged, you just fall in love with BSD.
But when it comes to performance, from an user point of view, Linux still looks better.
My home workstation has both FreeBSD 5-current and Gentoo Linux. I lately installed a 2.5.x kernel (the current running one is 2.5.67-mm1), and I must say that I was really impressed.
Not sure how latest Linux kernels perform in a server environment, but on a workstation, everything is very responsive. Even when there is a lot of I/O (local disk-to-disk backups) or CPU activity (compilation), KDE is always smooth. Under load, Windows can take some time to refresh their content, but as soon as something is typed on the keyboard, or clicked with the mouse, the effect is immediate.
While FreeBSD is rather fast (it looks like there was a big speedup regarding disk I/O between FreeBSD 4.x and 5.x), I now find it slow when I switch from Linux to FreeBSD.
Slow is maybe not the right word, but there is a lot of "lag". When the system is busy, there's a slight delay between an action with the mouse or the keyboard and its effect. This is especially noticable with Konqueror. And when there is a compilation going on, XMMS oftens stops playing properly (there are cutoffs in the sound)
I also tried Mnogosearch (MySQL 4 + cache mode) on both Linux and FreeBSD 5-current. Searches are as fast on both OS. But during indexation, when the cached daemon flushes its buffers, FreeBSD nearly freezes. I mean that even logging in through SSH becomes very long. On Linux, although the hard disk seems to turns a lot, the system keeps being responsive for other tasks.
{{.sig}}
Why bother with mysql my friend when PostgreSQL is there.
Performance arguments do not work, see the latest benchmarks.
Mysql got whipped.
Take a look at FreeBSD's performance on the popular soekris hardware... > >> FreeBSD 4.7 39.6 Mbps / 28.5 Mbps > >> FreeBSD 5.0 30.4 Mbps / 22.3 Mbps > >> OpenBSD 3.2 32.4 Mbps / 24.4 Mbps > >> Linux 2.4 41.6 Mbps / 32.6 Mbps > > > > Was this with polling enabled? Interesting numbers. The ipfw overhead is > > higher than I'd have thought. > > OK, I finally got around to do some testing with polling enabled: > > FreeBSD 4.7+DEVICE_POLLING,HZ=2000 52.1 Mbps / 39.4 Mbps -SU
My own and others!
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
If they could only make patching easier, so everytime a bind, sendmail, or other hack is discovered, one doesnt have to;
cvsup the source tree
rebuild the system
rebuild the kernel
boot single user
install new kernel
install new system components
mergemaster
reboot again.
This is a royal f***in pita, up2date looks sinfully easy compared to this.
Where do you want to be, What are you doing to get there.