From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 16 18:02:10 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA5C1106566B; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 18:02:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthew@phoronix.com) Received: from phx1.phoronix.com (173.192.77.202-static.reverse.softlayer.com [173.192.77.202]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A75978FC13; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 18:02:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mobile-166-205-138-224.mycingular.net ([166.205.138.224] helo=www.palm.com) by phx1.phoronix.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RbbOg-0006dP-AI; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:16:39 -0600 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:16:36 -0800 From: To: "Adrian Chadd" , "Stefan Esser" In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Palm webOS X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - phx1.phoronix.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - phoronix.com Message-Id: <20111216180210.DA5C1106566B@hub.freebsd.org> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 22:02:27 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Joe Holden , FreeBSD Stable Mailing List , Michael Larabel , Current FreeBSD , Arnaud Lacombe , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, "O. Hartmann" , Jeremy Chadwick Subject: Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 18:02:10 -0000 Thanks. My request for the person documenting the tunings also runs = the benchmark to ensure expected behaviour. The installation, execut= ion and comparison against the benchmarks in the article is fairly simple.<= br> Note that some tuning may not be relevant or recommended (ie: some o= f the fs benchmarks are sensitive to barriers and other synchronous operati= ons). I'd recommend bowing out of a benchmark with a 'we're going to = be slower since the default configuration is this way for the following rea= son' if this is the case. Thanks 'someone'. Matthew Dec 16, 2011 8:46 AM,= Adrian Chadd wrote: Can someone please write up a nice, concise blog post somewhere=0D= outlining all of this?=0D =0D Extra bonus points if it's a blog t= hat is picked up by=0D blogs.freebsdish.org and/or some of the other BSD= sites.=0D =0D Guys/girls/fuzzy things - this is 2011; people look at= shiny blog=0D sites with graphs rather than mailing lists. Sorry, we lo= st that=0D battle. :)=0D =0D =0D =0D Adrian=0D __________= _____________________________________=0D freebsd-performance@freebsd.org= mailing list=0D http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-perfo= rmance=0D To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscr= ibe@freebsd.org"=0D