Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 20:36:14 +0000 () From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: brandon@tombstone.sunrem.com, dyson@freefall.freebsd.org, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux vs FreeBSD comparison - it's time, I think! Message-ID: <199603062036.UAA00351@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <199603062140.IAA07776@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Mar 7, 96 08:40:49 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > >I agree, all of the Linux/FreeBSD benchmarks that I have posted have been on > >the same hardware. I have a Linux partition always bootable, with > >a spare partition that can be EXT2FS or FFS at will. I am not unbiased > > This is fine if you know how to interpret the benchmarks, but for an > unbiased report the following are required: > > - SAME partitions. The outer tracks are usually faster. > - SAME level of tuning. Benchark the release versions and spend a few > few days learning the quirks of the install programs to make sure > that you're testing vanilla versions, or benchmark tuned versions and > spend a few months learning how to fine tune them similarly. > That is what I have done. The goal of my tests has been to find the truth so that I can make sure that FreeBSD is keeping up (and fix it where it isn't.) Sometimes I post results, but public comparison has not been my motivation. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603062036.UAA00351>