Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 05:04:59 +1000 From: Greg Black <gjb@gbch.net> To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> Cc: Sergey Babkin <babkin@bellatlantic.net>, "Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, mhagerty@voyager.net Subject: Re: Article: Network performance by OS Message-ID: <nospam-992804699.84478@maxim.gbch.net> In-Reply-To: <200106171721.f5HHLIu06985@earth.backplane.com> of Sun, 17 Jun 2001 10:21:18 MST References: <200106162031.f5GKVfm16209@saturn.cs.uml.edu> <200106162104.f5GL4dX02015@earth.backplane.com> <3B2CDC8C.3C7E382A@bellatlantic.net> <200106171721.f5HHLIu06985@earth.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matt Dillon wrote: | 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. This is indeed the case. I've been running FreeBSD releases from the CD subscription service since 2.2.6 on my own network and all my customer networks. I do build a new kernel each time so that I can drop all the drivers that aren't needed (as that halves the kernel size), but that takes only a few minutes per release and is a no-brainer. And then those boxes just run and FreeBSD just works and the performance for those real world operations is excellent -- reliability is 100% and speed is such that users feel that they're getting instant responses. That's the only kind of benchmark that matters. 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?nospam-992804699.84478>