From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 29 19:30:48 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D0DF1065676 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:30:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ohartman@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de) Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de [130.133.4.66]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B09F8FC15 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:30:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) with esmtp (envelope-from ) id <1MshzT-0004ou-VC>; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:03:59 +0200 Received: from e178010082.adsl.alicedsl.de ([85.178.10.82] helo=thor.walstatt.dyndns.org) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) with esmtpsa (envelope-from ) id <1MshzT-0007Yt-SW>; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:03:59 +0200 Message-ID: <4AC25A1F.9000405@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:03:59 +0200 From: "O. Hartmann" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090822) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Kuriger References: <200909290226.CAA28246@sopwith.solgatos.com> <689d500ec8c95542a53440b8a23ae773@mail.liquidphlux.com> In-Reply-To: <689d500ec8c95542a53440b8a23ae773@mail.liquidphlux.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: 85.178.10.82 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:15:58 +0000 Cc: Dieter , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Ubuntu - Discuss... X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:30:48 -0000 Andrew Kuriger wrote: > On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:26:34 PDT, Dieter > wrote: >> In message , >> Francisco Reyes writes: >>> Steven Hartland writes: >>> >>>> Just noticed the following posted on phoronix: >>>> > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=freebsd8_ubuntu910&num=1 >>>> Comments? >>> This was discussed in detail in slashdot.. starting with the fact that >>> most >>> likely debug switches were not turned off for FreeBSD. >> "All of the FreeBSD and Ubuntu options were left at their defaults." >> >> My question is why is FreeBSD's disk i/o performance so bad? >> Not just in the benchmarks with debugging on, but in real world usage >> where it actually matters. >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > Well for one if we look at /usr/src/UPDATING > > "NOTE TO PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT FreeBSD 8.x IS SLOW: > FreeBSD 8.x has many debugging features turned on, in both the kernel and > userland. These features attempt to detect incorrect use of system > primitives, and encourage loud failure through extra sanity checking and > fail stop semantics. They also substantially impact system performance. If > you want to do performance measurement, benchmarking, and optimization, > you'll want to turn them off. This includes various WITNESS- related kernel > options, INVARIANTS, malloc debugging flags in userland, and various > verbose features in the kernel. Many developers choose to disable these > features on build machines to maximize performance. (To disable malloc > debugging, run ln -s aj /etc/malloc.conf.)" > > Since the article says that they left the debugging features on I think > this has a bit to do with it. Obviously the testers didn't care to read the > documentation, and didn't seem to care to use the same compiler which is > available in ports, I believe it is safe to chuck this lame benchmark. > > ~Andrew > I doubt that debugging switches left in some places a normal admin or user can't get so easy are the reason why FreeBSD 8.0-RC performs that bad compared to Ubuntu 9,1-Linux. The question at this point would be, whether debugging was enabled on Linux as well or not ... Oliver