FreeBSD 7.0 Bests Linux In SMP Performance

cecom writes "After major improvements in SMP support in FreeBSD 7.0, benchmarks show it performing 15% better than the latest Linux kernels (PDF, see slides 17 to 19) on 8 CPUs under PostgreSQL and MySQL. While a couple of benchmarks are not conclusive evidence, it can be assumed that FreeBSD will once again be a serious performance contender. Some posters on LWN have noted that the level of Linux performance could be related to the Completely Fair Scheduler, which was merged into the 2.6.23 Linux kernel." Update: 03/06 21:32 GMT by KD : An anonymous reader sent in word that Linux kernel developer Nick Piggin reran the benchmark today and came to a different conclusion: In his benchmark Linux was faster than FreeBSD.

Comments

Re:BSD Desktops

[RiotingPacifist]

yeah whe you only have 101 (its much quicker type than explicitly spelling out the and) users you just don't have time to setup distros.

Whats the advantage of not having any distros? that everything needs to be compiled from source (ala gentoo) or that everything is precompiled for somebody else's needs (ala debian). While i see that BSD does have many advantages (reliablity, checked code, speed), i really don't see how not-having distros is one, sure it means you don't have to choose a distro, but it also means you cant. The linux distros mean that there is constant competition to deliver the best desktop/server/freest/fastest/securest/smallest/scientific/livecd/usb distro, and while it means there is some duplication of effort the overall pace of development is quite fast (fortunately a lot of the development then makes it into BSDs, but FreeBSD needs linux alot more than linux needs freeBSD (especially as stupid license nazis stop us sharing code *shakes fist*))

p.s the FTA is a troll as this was already coverd at freebsd release time and the wise pointed out that solaris still beats both systems

(as /. mods seam to have degenerated to youtube levels recently, ill have to point out that the top of this post IS a joke, it IS NOT flamebait, and the meat of the post is below. Oh and dear god the comment in brackets is ironic, not stupid)

Re:Why do you "need" distros?

[RiotingPacifist]

What's the advantage of having multiple distros? Choice
while some distros provide only Free software (debian) others provide easy ways of installing proprietary software (ubuntu)

theyre compiled differently
some are designed for servers ( compiled with flags that dont include support for libLatestGUI ) others a designed for desktops ( compiled with all the gui flags)
some are designed to run of liveCDs ( compiled with flags that support whats on the CD but nothing else ) others are designed to be permanent installs ( compiled with flags for everything )
youd need one hell of a binary package managment system to pull that off

theyre patched differently
while some distros will patch quickly to fix a bug, others will pay more attention to the quality of the code to prevent latter patching

theyre released differently
while some push fiarly stable releases out every 6 months (ubuntu) other have longer more stable release cycles (debian) or none at all (they stay in perpetual beta)
while some test software thoroughly and pay attention to fixing bugs, others get it working and push it out the door to the users

they develop different software
while one might want the develop an easy to use gui installer (ubuntu), another might develop a complex full of options CLI installer (debian)
while one might develop a new gui with flashy effects (suse), another might develop a new lightweight GUI for older systems
while one might concentrate on making drivers another might concentrate on supporting closed sourced drivers

Im no expert so some of the above examples might not be true.

AFAIK bsd code cant be clinked to gpl code ( i dont know much about licenses tho)