Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 12:24:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fumerola <billf@chc-chimes.com> To: Seth <seth@freebie.dp.ny.frb.org> Cc: Donald Wilde <dwilde1@thuntek.net>, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Benchmarking web apps on Apache Message-ID: <Pine.HPP.3.96.990708122248.14681C-100000@hp9000.chc-chimes.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9907081629200.98016-100000@freebie.dp.ny.frb.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Seth wrote: > Hold up a sec. FreeBSD did NOT perform as well. Check the stats again. > The only things FreeBSD beat the other OS in was serving STATIC pages (and > mod_perl handler stuff). The "crucial" tests (dynamic content via cgi's) > showed the other OS to edge out our beloved FreeBSD. > > On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Donald Wilde wrote: > > > I wasn't concerned with his methodology, Bill, although I noticed the > > three points you make in a cursory glance. I would suspect it's #1 > > that's the reason FBSD works better. My only reason for the cross-post > > is that FreeBSD came out better. If we recall the vanished gartner group > > report, they came out with a more than 15% improvement for FreeBSD. I'd also like to add that we'd cry foul as loud as anyone if these "benchmarks" showed any other OS beating us. (I am, I guess) Let's not be hypocritical and shout from the tops of rooftops any benchmark that makes us look better unless we're really sure the benchmark is legit. - bill fumerola - billf@chc-chimes.com - BF1560 - computer horizons corp - - ph:(800) 252-2421 - bfumerol@computerhorizons.com - billf@FreeBSD.org - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.HPP.3.96.990708122248.14681C-100000>