From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 7 16:10:33 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4B5D16A4CE for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 16:10:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kanga.honeypot.net (kanga.honeypot.net [208.162.254.122]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0050E43D5D for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 16:10:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kirk@strauser.com) Received: from pooh.strauser.com (pooh.honeypot.net [10.0.5.128]) by kanga.honeypot.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i37N9ODW039724 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 18:09:24 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from kirk@strauser.com) To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <40745C07.6030501@fer.hr> From: Kirk Strauser Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 18:09:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: <40745C07.6030501@fer.hr> (Ivan Voras's message of "Wed, 07 Apr 2004 21:52:39 +0200") Message-ID: <877jwre672.fsf@strauser.com> Lines: 46 X-Mailer: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Virus-Scanned: clamd / ClamAV version devel-20040331, clamav-milter version 0.70a Subject: Re: Benchmarking X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 23:10:33 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 2004-04-07T19:52:39Z, Ivan Voras writes: > I've finished the article on benchmarking FreeBSD, NetBSD, DragonflyBSD > and Linux, it is available at: > > http://alfredo.cc.fer.hr/ Prepare to be flamed (not by me, but in general). The tests are littered with comments like: Missing data in the above table signifies operations that were too fast to measure correctly by the bonnie++ program. People will wonder why you chose not to increase the number of files being tested so as to get meaningful results. Viewers are left looking at a mostly-empty table where the BSDs dominate the results by a large margin, but are told: Linux clearly wins the IO throughput test, having a score upto about 130% better than nearest BSD, either by having a better SCSI driver, or because the system itself is just faster. Since you didn't *publish* any results were Linux won, I'll have to assume that your private data demonstrated a different conclusion. You describe your custom FreeBSD 5 kernel as keeping the WITNESS options. In NetBSD, you say: Because of my clumsiness with the installer, or the presence of some bugs regarding modifying a FreeBSD partition setup, I wasn"t able to partition the drive as intended, but instead the default partition scheme was used. Full stop. End of test. You're now comparing bananas to pencils. Basically, you ran some tests on divergent systems and got some results, but that's about the only conclusion I was able to get from it. =2D-=20 Kirk Strauser "94 outdated ports on the box, 94 outdated ports. Portupgrade one, an hour 'til done, 82 outdated ports on the box." --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBAdIok5sRg+Y0CpvERAnqDAJ4pm1jhxDsphr/EZsZlpCn486HrLgCglp1v bMdTI1KgZIFLzp6YLlVdmFU= =rjxC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--