From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Aug 13 19:11:47 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA15226 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 13 Aug 1997 19:11:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from buffnet4.buffnet.net (buffnet4.buffnet.net [205.246.19.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA15221 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 1997 19:11:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from buffnet11.buffnet.net (shovey@buffnet11.buffnet.net [205.246.19.55]) by buffnet4.buffnet.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA13388; Wed, 13 Aug 1997 22:11:38 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 22:11:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Steve Hovey To: "Jay D. Nelson" cc: Paul Dekkers , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD is slower than Linux !? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I cant believe this - I had a linux box doing IRC, httpd and mailing lists . It was cracked into a wiped, and the cdrom the linux was on had a bad spot and couldnt be restored. I put freebsd on it, and not only is it much more responsive, but it was so much so that I was able to add functions, and cancel a hardware upgrade. On Wed, 13 Aug 1997, Jay D. Nelson wrote: > Hmm... It might be revealing if you tried all of that with a couple of > compiles and a tar of /usr running simultaneously. Final combined > times may be more revealing. > > -- Jay > > On Thu, 14 Aug 1997, Paul Dekkers wrote: > > >Hi > > > >I did some speed tests and I'd like to hear some reaction about this. > > > > Linux FreeBSD > >dd 2.61 4.95 dd if=/dev/zero of=/test bs=1024 count=5000 > >gzip 12.50 11.01 gzip -9 test > >gunzip 3.86 8.12 > >sync 4.21 0.9 -> So it seems FreeBSD writes everything to > > disk directly?! WHY? This makes FreeBSD > > much slower! > >unzips 4.45 41.92 decompress the sendmail distr > >compil 353.79 371.87 compile sendmail (makesendmail) > > > >Yes, I used the same (slow) disk on my i486 > >But I was really surprised discovering that FreeBSD is much slower in disk > >access than Linux, so why is the filesystem called FFS (fast-filesystem?!) > >;-) > > > >But, my main question -> I think FreeBSD is that slow because it writes > >everything to disk directly, without a good cache. Why is this like it is? > >This does not make FreeBSD very attractive for me to use as a fileserver > >(nfs or samba) or e.g. a mail server. > > > >-= Paul =- > > > > -- Jay > >