Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:21:07 -0800 (PST) From: Jake Hamby <jehamby@lightside.com> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: "Ron G. Minnich" <rminnich@Sarnoff.COM>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Linux vs FreeBSD comparison - it's time, I think! Message-ID: <Pine.AUX.3.91.960306100339.14566B-100000@covina.lightside.com> In-Reply-To: <199603061519.IAA22625@rover.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 6 Mar 1996, Warner Losh wrote: > Yes. I agree. We should also pick stable versions of Linux. Right > now the 1.3.x series is going through a rough patch. We should likely > compare 1.4.x to 2.1-stable. Later, we can compare 1.5.x to 2.2. > Also, which distribution of Linux becomes a problem... We could compare 1.3.x with -current, perhaps emphasizing that even our "experimental" version is just as stable as Linux's experimental kernels. Plus, we can emphasize that our entire distribution tree is integrated, not just the kernel, so components are regression-tested with each other, not in isolation. As for which distribution of Linux, maybe we should use Slackware since it seems to be very popular and is the version that Walnut Creek offers, but again, we can emphasize our SINGLE distribution as another advantage of FreeBSD! > Things that FreeBSD is good at, relative to older linuxes (and maybe > current ones): > *LARGE* numbers of FTP users > *HUGE* routing tables > *INSANE* HTTP performance The recent Stanford benchmark showed that FreeBSD had twice the networking performance (on TCP, UDP, and NFS benchmarks) as Linux! This was comparing 2.0.5-RELEASE to 1.2.x Linux. I've noticed FreeBSD consistently gives me 15% better PPP performance (over 28.8kbps modem, using ijppp) than Linux (both 1.2.x and 1.3.x). > Linux seems to be a little better at context switch time and low low > level things like that, but doesn't scale well. That would be a good > selling point. ext2fs is also supposed to be better for small metadata updates, such as a news server or compiling would use. And Linux is better at context switching as you mentioned, but the 1.2.x kernel really bogs down once you have more than 20 or 30 processes (it uses a linear search). 1.3.x fixes this, but again, the results are in the Stanford study (that I forget the URL to at the moment, damn!) > Just some thoughts. I know that the Linux folks are doing work in the > performance areas as we speak... In addition to performance, we have the following advantages, which I will list briefly: 1) Ports/packages collection (whoohoo!) 2) Conformant to an accepted Unix standard: 4.4BSD 3) Single build tree for kernel and utilities, rather than kernel and EVERY SINGLE core utility or library being separate .tar.gz's on Sunsite!!! 4) Can install over FTP from a SINGLE floppy (no boot/root fiasco) 5) Can have multiple slices in a single FDISK partition 6) Runs BSDI software (like Netscape Commerce Server) 7) Runs Linux software (soon to be ELF?) 8) "Open" development, unlike many Linux distributions (like Slackware) controlled by a single person (who often doesn't respond to e-mail bug reports, I can say from experience!) 9) System administration VERY similar to BSDI and NetBSD, and even SunOS (because of #2). 10) The core team is professional and places an emphasis on stability and good software engineering techniques (I'm not trying to be flattering, it is true!) To be fair, here are some advantages of Linux: 1) More users means more device driver support. 2) More users means more documentation (books at Egghead, etc..) and more press coverage (although, as Microsoft demonstrates time and again, better press coverage does not a good product indicate!) 3) For the novice, Slackware will interactively describe each package and ask whether or not you want it. This could get tiresome with FreeBSD with over 350 packages, but I must admit, I did learn about some cool Unix programs installing Linux in this way. Similarly, when configuring the kernel, it interactively asks questions, which I find extremely annoying, but it might help novice users a little bit. 4) Runs SVGAlib for people that don't have the RAM for X and want to play with graphics (like DOOM). 5) Has other nifty console features like gpm (for console cut-and-paste with mouse). Okay, this can be the foundation of a table comparing FreeBSD and Linux. I said in my last message I was pretty busy, but if you send me e-mail with more FreeBSD likes/dislikes and FreeBSD/Linux comparisons, I will volunteer to type it up into a Web page (most likely with hypertext links for further information), which should be ready for use on www.freebsd.org in a few weeks. Thanks! ---Jake
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.AUX.3.91.960306100339.14566B-100000>