Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 10:21:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> To: Sergey Babkin <babkin@bellatlantic.net> Cc: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, mhagerty@voyager.net Subject: Re: Article: Network performance by OS Message-ID: <200106171721.f5HHLIu06985@earth.backplane.com> References: <200106162031.f5GKVfm16209@saturn.cs.uml.edu> <200106162104.f5GL4dX02015@earth.backplane.com> <3B2CDC8C.3C7E382A@bellatlantic.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:...
:> to know the first thing about the platform he is running his software
:> on is a complete and utter idiot and the company that employs such a
:> person has a hellofalot more to worry about then the performance of an
:> untuned machine.
:
:We are telling people that FreeBSD is primarily a good server OS,
:right ? Then it should come with the standard configuration tuned
:with this purpose in mind. Not "foolproof", not "workstation" but
:"high-performance server".
:
:IMHO this is a big problem with too many Unix (including Linux)
:and generally Open Source programs and systems. They allow to
:do great things after being properly tuned. However the default
:configuration supplied with them is utterly horrible by some
:mysterious reason. So the learning curve for them is quite steep
But this isn't true at all. How many people need to make thousands
or tens of thousands of simultanious connections to a machine out of the
box? Almost nobody. So to run a benchmark and have it hit these
limitations on an untuned machine and then say that this somehow proves
that the boxes needed to be better-tuned out of the box is just plain
and simply hogwash.
Out of the box, FreeBSD (and Linux) work just fine for virtually
anything you need to do, with very few exceptions. If you need to
run a huge multi-gigabyte database, or you need to run an EFNET IRC
server, or a USENET relay, or a SPAM mailer, then you have a bit of
tuning work to do. Otherwise it will just work. We tune our default
configurations for what most people need. We don't tune them to run
stupid benchmarks.
:and requires to learn the product in deep and tune it before
:using. Well, I do enjoy learning things, however tuning the
:same things in each new version over and over again for the 10th
:time becomes quite boring.
Nonsense. If you intend to work a machine to the hilt, and expect to
maintain it for any length of time, and you aren't willing to spend
some time tuning it, then the only thing wrong with the picture is
*you*, Not the machine, Not the OS... but you. Don't blame your problems
on the machine if you aren't willing to lift a finger learning how it
works.
-Matt
:This is not to say that Windows is better: the default
:configurations are usually slightly better but there is no
:[reasonably easy] way whatsoever to make them decent.
:
:-SB
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200106171721.f5HHLIu06985>