From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Aug 20 20:10:17 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id UAA07861
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 20 Aug 1995 20:10:17 -0700
Received: from blob.best.net (blob.best.net [204.156.128.88])
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA07851
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 20 Aug 1995 20:10:14 -0700
Received: from geli.clusternet (rcarter.vip.best.com [204.156.137.2]) by blob.best.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA23772; Sun, 20 Aug 1995 20:10:19 -0700
Received: (from rcarter@localhost) by geli.clusternet (8.6.11/8.6.9) id UAA17917; Sun, 20 Aug 1995 20:06:38 -0700
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 20:06:38 -0700
From: "Russell L. Carter" <rcarter@geli.com>
Message-Id: <199508210306.UAA17917@geli.clusternet>
To: dyson@freefall.FreeBSD.org, hasty@rah.star-gate.com
Subject: Re: Why Linux? (fwd)
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org, terry@cs.weber.edu
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


Well, I am getting a lot of questions about why FreeBSD over
Linux, and because the data was too sparse I have refused to
do it, but I would really like to add this information to
http://www.geli.com  Nothing about what John reports is news
to me.

Russell

Curious though, I deal with low-latency networking types for a 
(partial) living, and I have had more than one mention the 
syscall.s in Linux as the model for syscall overhead.  Shouldn't
this show up somewhere in user land?

|In fact, why don't you get someone or you can do it yourself and 
|make an html page. This sort of information has to go out and 
|reach people.
|
|	My sound bits,
|	Amancio
|
|>>> John Dyson said:
| > I just did a competitive performance analysis of FreeBSD vs. Linux.  I
| > can't say that FreeBSD was the CLEAR winner, but it was much faster
| > in many key areas.  The only place that I can see that Linux is
| > architecturally faster is in the async filesystem stuff.  Generally,
| > FreeBSD's networking (TCP) is at least 50% faster.  FreeBSD's VM
| > stuff is much faster.  I cannot see where people say that Linux needs
| > less memory either.  I ran some memory loading benchmarks on FreeBSD and
| > Linux, where FreeBSD was a generic kernel and Linux was a "nice" subset
| > V1.3.20.  It appears that FreeBSD handles loads much better.  Also,
| > when running Linux I noticed an "old-friend" -- the bouncy SVR3 feel.
| > Things generally appear to run a bit slower on Linux, including sequential
| > file I/O.  I am sure that Linux can fix up these minor performance nits,
| > but it does seem to run ok.
| > 
| > I have results on request -- I just don't want to post them yet.  If there
| > is a big demand, I will though..
| > 
| > John
| > dyson@root.com
|
|
|