From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 15 07:40:34 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 188321065672; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:40:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vw0-f54.google.com (mail-vw0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89E108FC16; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:40:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbbfr13 with SMTP id fr13so2103260vbb.13 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 23:40:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=z/7NpF07+xvfN4qI0sYfDhw2Q31cy25YPhN7EvKe9tI=; b=xYzKxuzfXTM9YnmvW9fwiVbRDobNVzSTGbhecrQTSS+SdcqwJI9Aq97K6nmz45H3Ya Hja4UYIFjpodGDLXcoHbuDdt9JFShzlS1R7W7AG0Z6ln17JzHfIVNKKR38b+BgQToMoe uZqsruqX6c8W9+6gDbRzq7kLJEA/k6bnmECbE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.67.111 with SMTP id m15mr1625754vdt.96.1323934832733; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 23:40:32 -0800 (PST) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.26.50 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 23:40:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com> <4EE933C6.4020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20111215024249.GA13557@icarus.home.lan> <4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 23:40:32 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: URhgjaXgcqV2vgLQyrCg_OMuz-M Message-ID: From: Adrian Chadd To: "O. Hartmann" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Current FreeBSD , FreeBSD Stable Mailing List , Jeremy Chadwick Subject: Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:40:34 -0000 On 14 December 2011 23:32, O. Hartmann wrote: > Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today: > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTAyNzA > > It may be worth to discuss the sad performance of FBSD in some parts of > the benchmark. A difference of a factor 10 or 100 is simply far beyond Well, the only way it's going to get fixed is if someone sits down, replicates it, and starts to document exactly what it is that these benchmarks are/aren't doing. Sometimes it's because the benchmark is very much tickling things incorrectly. In a lot of cases though, the benchmark is testing something synthetic that Linux just happens to have micro-optimised. So if you care about this a lot, someone needs to stand up, work with Phronix to get some actual feedback about what's going on, and see if it can be fixed. Maybe you'll find ULE is broken in some instances; I bet you'll find something like "the disk driver is suboptimal." For example, I remember seeing someone mess up a test because they split their filesystems across raid5 boundaries, and this was hidden by the choice of raid controller and stripe size. This made FreeBSD look worse; when this was corrected for, it sped up far past Linux. Adrian