From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 6 18:11:43 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07BD816A4CF for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:11:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.194]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 779C343D48 for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:11:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sander.vesik@gmail.com) Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id y7so28562rne for ; Thu, 06 Jan 2005 10:11:41 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=aeMfY6OgN6ZTqp8K1v94nE7ZubX099IoI0BYh5Nc02zikxQby0y8qohft3auORoSuMOBDk1XqX/aGVEvBpJyX/2Ylh5GdE897VWvG/OpEr+x8IFSc2QDSQtycYhlGR+dibevrTntzF6f7sAxkEQO1KKJRLJuwlO+X+H654mQX0A= Received: by 10.38.208.29 with SMTP id f29mr381130rng; Thu, 06 Jan 2005 10:11:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.38.66.66 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Jan 2005 10:11:41 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 20:11:41 +0200 From: Sander Vesik To: Josef El-Rayes In-Reply-To: <20050106121948.GA7848@daemon.li> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <20050106121948.GA7848@daemon.li> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 19:30:14 +0000 cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: Hubert Feyrer cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Benchmark: NetBSD 2.0 beats FreeBSD 5.3 in server performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Sander Vesik List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 18:11:43 -0000 On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 12:19:49 +0000, Josef El-Rayes wrote: > Hubert Feyrer : > > [...] > > > The results indicate that NetBSD > > has surpassed FreeBSD in performance on nearly every benchmark and > > is poised to grab the title of the best operating system for the > > server environment.'' > > I think this is a conclusion drawn too early when there has not been > any comparison of each SMP implementation. > No one runs a toaster as a server environment. No but many people run servers on single CPU machines and performance on those matters too. Just because a benchmark result is not what you might like it to tell you doesn't mean its not valid or that it doesn't highlight valid concerns. For example on the process creation benchmark (and yes, it is a valid and interesting benchmark, even in uniprocessor case), its clear that both systems exhibit a split behaviour where in some processes are creating in some linear minimal time and others scale lineraily with number of processes. It just happens that in case of freebsd the majority appear to follow the linear case. There are also cases where FreeBSD is clearly ahead, which is good. > > greets, josef > -- > Josef El-Rayes (__) > Email: josef@daemon.li \\\'',) > Web: http://daemon.li/ \/ \ ^ > FreeBSD Security Team .\._/_)