From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Mar 6 17:40:54 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id RAA23697 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 17:40:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA23684 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 17:40:48 -0800 (PST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.6.11/8.6.9) id UAA00351; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 20:36:15 GMT From: "John S. Dyson" Message-Id: <199603062036.UAA00351@dyson.iquest.net> Subject: Re: Linux vs FreeBSD comparison - it's time, I think! To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 20:36:14 +0000 () Cc: brandon@tombstone.sunrem.com, dyson@freefall.freebsd.org, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199603062140.IAA07776@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Mar 7, 96 08:40:49 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > > >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