Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 04:19:13 -0700 From: ray@redshift.com To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@flat.berklix.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.3/4 vs 4.11 Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20050613041913.00a64470@pop.redshift.com> In-Reply-To: <200506130942.j5D9g4SN006890@fire.jhs.private> References: <Message from ray@redshift.com of "Mon, 13 Jun 2005 02:14:10 PDT." <3.0.1.32.20050613021410.00a56bb8@pop.redshift.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
yeah, thanks. I'm subscribed to performance also - it's kinda dead over there. I'll check the archives also, thanks. Ray At 11:42 AM 6/13/2005 +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote: | ray@redshift.com wrote: | > Hello list, | > | > I've recently been doing quite a few benchmarks with regard to PHP and Apache, | > as well as stripping down the Kernel on 5.3 and 5.4 to improve performance for | > web/application servers. | > | > My question is: I was wondering if anyone out there has ever done a head to head | > test of 4.11 to 5.3 (or 5.4) and if so, is 4.11 faster in any areas and/or does | > it provide any benefits over 5.3+? | | There was a discussion of performance just recently on one if the | main lists (ie current or hackers or stable, can't remember) However | you'll find it by browsing the the mail archives via | http://www.freebsd.org. | | FreeBSD has a mail list dedicated to discussing performance issues. | I suggest you subscribe it, after first browsing those archives: | http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance/ | | - | Julian Stacey Net & Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com | Mail in Ascii (Html=Spam). Ihr Rauch = mein allergischer Kopfschmerz. | |
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.1.32.20050613041913.00a64470>