From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 31 01:01:08 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADCC216A417 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:01:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from youshi10@u.washington.edu) Received: from mxout7.cac.washington.edu (mxout7.cac.washington.edu [140.142.32.178]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D50D13C45A for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:01:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from youshi10@u.washington.edu) Received: from hymn08.u.washington.edu (hymn08.u.washington.edu [140.142.13.238]) by mxout7.cac.washington.edu (8.13.7+UW06.06/8.13.7+UW07.06) with ESMTP id l7V10d5E004253 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:00:40 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hymn08.u.washington.edu (8.13.7+UW06.06/8.13.7+UW07.03) with ESMTP id l7V10duk017728; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:00:39 -0700 X-Auth-Received: from [192.55.52.2] by hymn08.u.washington.edu via HTTP; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:00:39 PDT Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:00:39 -0700 (PDT) From: youshi10@u.washington.edu To: Emanuel Marufo In-Reply-To: <8d954c40708301559k3a2fe847s38097a34d9be8307@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-PMX-Version: 5.3.3.310218, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.1.298604, Antispam-Data: 2007.8.30.173722 X-Uwash-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIII, Probability=7%, Report='SUPERLONG_LINE 0.05, NO_REAL_NAME 0, __CT 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0' Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tunning Freebsd for clustering X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:01:08 -0000 On Thu, 30 Aug 2007, Emanuel Marufo wrote: > Hi everybody: > > I recently work with mpi on FBSD 6.2 and Centos 4.4 on the same hardware. > > 2 Woodcrest dual core 3Ghz > 2 GB RAM. > 150 GB SATA disc. > etc, etc. > > > My tests, about network and hard disk transfers, say Centos is faster > than FBSD. > > My questions are, how can tunning FBSD to upgrade the performance for > clustering?. And why Centos do have better performance?. > > NOTE: The two tests on the fbsd was better are floating point > operations and recursitivity, i was impresed with a better managing of > it. Don't count out 7-CURRENT. It's basically frozen now awaiting release sometime within the next couple months and is much better at dealing with concurrency than 6.2, in particular if you use the ULE scheduler instead of the 4BSD scheduler. Latest copies of 7-CURRENT also include gcc 4.2.1 which is a lot better than gcc 3.4.2 with later edition processors (like the Woodcrest Xeons for instance), with dealing with larger processor caches IIRC. There may be some things though in Linux which do run faster though, but please remember that performance is a function of many different factors, and your experience may vary from others who've done experiments before you. Cheers, -Garrett