From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Dec 22 10:55:53 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A60616A41A
	for <stable@freebsd.org>; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:55:53 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from uspoerlein@gmail.com)
Received: from acme.spoerlein.net (acme.spoerlein.net [217.172.44.86])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D083D13C45B
	for <stable@freebsd.org>; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:55:52 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from uspoerlein@gmail.com)
Received: from roadrunner.spoerlein.net (e180138246.adsl.alicedsl.de
	[85.180.138.246])
	by acme.spoerlein.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id lBMAXvW3050133
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
	Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:33:58 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from uspoerlein@gmail.com)
Received: from roadrunner.spoerlein.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by roadrunner.spoerlein.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id
	lBMAXqTj003287
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:33:52 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from uspoerlein@gmail.com)
Received: (from q@localhost)
	by roadrunner.spoerlein.net (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id lBMAXpU3003286;
	Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:33:51 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from uspoerlein@gmail.com)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:33:50 +0100
From: Ulrich Spoerlein <uspoerlein@gmail.com>
To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net>
Message-ID: <20071222103350.GA2747@roadrunner.spoerlein.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net>, stable@freebsd.org
References: <200712220531.WAA09277@lariat.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200712220531.WAA09277@lariat.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on acme.spoerlein.net
Cc: stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: SMP on FreeBSD 6.x and 7.0: Worth doing?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:55:53 -0000

On Fri, 21.12.2007 at 22:31:24 -0700, Brett Glass wrote:
> As has been reported in some other messages on this list, Linux is currently 
> blowing FreeBSD away. It's taking as much as 20% less time to get through 
> the benchmark, depending on exactly how the random shuffle came out. This is 
> with 4 GB RAM, the GENERIC FreeBSD SMP kernel (using SCHED_ULE), and aufs as 
> the storage schema for Squid.

Apples and Oranges, I know, but if you're building a "simple" reverse
cacheing proxy, have you considered Varnish? Would be very interessting
how it would compare to a) FreeBSD+Squid b) Linux+Squid and c)
Linux+Varnish.

Cheers,
Ulrich Spoerlein
-- 
It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool,
than to speak, and remove all doubt.