From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 27 10:20:29 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB4231065670 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:20:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joel@FreeBSD.org) Received: from garland.euromail.se (imsc1.euromail.se [217.174.79.93]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2ACA98FC16 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:20:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joel@FreeBSD.org) Received: from (unknown [217.174.79.67]) by garland.euromail.se with smtp id 362e_566d6fd6_bc64_11dd_a5e3_00188b3329be; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:18:22 +0100 Received: from tyler.emailprod.vodafone.se ([192.168.106.59]) by waters.emailprod.vodafone.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:18:22 +0100 Received: from hackbook.local ([79.102.215.244]) by tyler.emailprod.vodafone.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:18:21 +0100 Message-ID: <492E65CC.2060900@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:18:04 +0100 From: Joel Dahl User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Macintosh/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ivan Voras References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> <492D3E95.1000106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Nov 2008 09:18:21.0844 (UTC) FILETIME=[17D9B540:01C95071] X-NAI-Spam-Level: * X-NAI-Spam-Score: 1 X-NAI-Spam-Report: 2 Rules triggered * 1 -- RCVD_DOT_NAME -- Suspect machine name in the received header * 0 -- RV3156 -- BODY: Version number Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:20:29 -0000 Ivan Voras skrev: > O. Hartmann wrote: >> Ivan Voras wrote: >> ... >> >>> OTOH if the goal is to measure "operating system" performance, this >>> must also include the compiler, libraries and all. (for example, what >>> does Solaris default to nowadays? I think it ships with gcc but not as >>> default). The hold on gcc 4.3 in FreeBSD is, after all, political >>> (licencing). >> This is very bad to read :-( > > I agree. GPL 3 is a bit hard on the non-GPL systems (i.e. harder than > GPL 2). > >> Many of my colleaugues are involved in HPC, very little of them >> (including myself) utilizing FreeBSD even due to the lack of fast >> compilers. Yes, we all can use the port, that is right, but for those >> not so familiar and deep inside the underlying OS, with newer, better >> hardware (CPUs with some interesting hardware features like SSE3/4) a >> on-track-following compiler like GCC 4.3 could make use of special >> features introduced in newer hardware and even due to better >> optimizations compile a faster OS. And the result, even in 3% or 5% >> performance gain is appreciated if model-runs taking days or weeks! > > AFAIK, gcc 4.3+ will always be available in the ports so users that need > it will always have it available (it's available there now!). It's just > that the base compiler will either stay 4.2, switch to something else Some of us are still hoping that PCC will be a viable option in the future, especially now that development has picked up again. It has a BSD-style license: http://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/ There's also an ongoing fundraiser for PCC development (in order to bring it to 1.0 release status): http://www.bsdfund.org/projects/pcc/ -- Joel