From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 23 21:00:14 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1BDE16A41F for ; Mon, 23 May 2005 21:00:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mikej@rogers.com) Received: from smtp103.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com (smtp103.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com [206.190.36.81]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4A18E43D1D for ; Mon, 23 May 2005 21:00:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mikej@rogers.com) Received: from unknown (HELO 172.16.0.1) (mikej@69.193.222.195 with login) by smtp103.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 May 2005 21:00:13 -0000 Received: from 172.16.0.199 (SquirrelMail authenticated user mikej) by 172.16.0.1 with HTTP; Mon, 23 May 2005 17:00:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3482.172.16.0.199.1116882013.squirrel@172.16.0.1> In-Reply-To: <20050523195123.GA13810@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <3248.172.16.0.199.1116876092.squirrel@172.16.0.1> <20050523195123.GA13810@xor.obsecurity.org> Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 17:00:13 -0400 (EDT) From: "Mike Jakubik" To: "Kris Kennaway" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.5.1 [CVS] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance of 4.x vs 5.x (Re: Lifetime of FreeBSD branches) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 21:00:14 -0000 On Mon, May 23, 2005 3:51 pm, Kris Kennaway said: > The common wisdom has been that FreeBSD 4.11 is faster than 5.4 on > single processor systems. Imagine my surprise when I went and actually > benchmarked this on the package build machines, and found that 5.4 > outperforms 4.11 by at least 10% when performing identical workloads on > identical UP hardware :-) > > Stay tuned for more details... To be honest, i have not (yet) done any specific benchmarks for my application, but overall, last time i used 4.x, it seemed more snappy. But, this is good to hear :)