Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:18:14 +0100
From:      Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>
To:        Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance
Message-ID:  <20081126131814.21221p9o7j3rryjo@webmail.leidinger.net>
In-Reply-To: <9bbcef730811260155h156b7a6v8c88b0da51f28ee@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <DE23C2B055DA4BC683BDCAA95FF7B736@multiplay.co.uk> <gggmbb$un6$1@ger.gmane.org> <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <ggher5$qq0$2@ger.gmane.org> <d763ac660811251202n5dafbbl896ad194435436a0@mail.gmail.com> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> <20081126094314.119834gt66jv0g00@webmail.leidinger.net> <9bbcef730811260155h156b7a6v8c88b0da51f28ee@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> (from Wed, 26 Nov 2008 =20
10:55:39 +0100):

> 2008/11/26 Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net>:
>
>> If you want to test OS performance and use Java programs in there to do s=
o,
>> you would use the same Java version, wouldn't you? They didn't.
>
> Linux: 1.6.0_0-b12
> Solaris: 1.6.0_10-b33
> FreeBSD: 1.6.0_07-b02

The important part is the _XX, not the -bYY. The bYY may be something =20
we don't care about, but the _XX part is something which may cause =20
performance differences.

> Since system have their local patches (I know FreeBSD does), I don't
> think it's even possible to test "exactly the same" version ;)
>
> But this also goes into the "What OS ships with" category.

We don't ship with java at all... strictly speaking. ;)

>> If you want to run number crunching software, you are interested in high
>> computing throughput of your app, so you use a compiler which performs be=
st
>> for your code in question (which would mean probably the Intel compiler o=
r
>> the Portland compiler on Linux, maybe the Sun compiler on Solaris, and
>> probably gcc on FreeBSD). You also want to optimize the code for your CPU
>> (it makes a difference if you do floating point calculations and are allo=
wed
>> to use the SSEx or whatever instructions), and not some generic settings =
the
>> OS comes with.
>
> I think they went with the "stock" configurations as that's what
> almost all users will use.

I fully agree. But number crunching (as benchmarked, and I'm not =20
talking about LAME which has a 2% difference) is not something almost =20
all users will do. Something the masses may do with the OS is not =20
covered at all, no browser tests, no interactivity (maybe with high =20
load in the background) tests. As I said, they don't even tell what =20
they want to test (and as such, everything we can do is speculate... =20
that's not something which will lead to interesting results in the =20
thread).

Bye,
Alexander.

--=20
Man must shape his tools lest they shape him.
=09=09-- Arthur R. Miller

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID =3D 72077137



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081126131814.21221p9o7j3rryjo>