Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 22:12:01 -0500 (CDT) From: "Jay D. Nelson" <jdn@qiv.com> To: Steve Hovey <shovey@buffnet.net> Cc: Paul Dekkers <psd@worldaccess.nl>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD is slower than Linux !? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970813215258.1519A-100000@acp.qiv.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.95.970813221036.12190Z-100000@buffnet11.buffnet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
That was my point. Put both under a real load and the differences are quite obvious. Most newcomers have no experience on working systems, so they compare to a single user PC. As newcomers gain experience they will understand and gain the ability to judge based on knowledge. Don't knock Linux, it will do more good than anything out of Redmond, Wa. -- Jay On Wed, 13 Aug 1997, Steve Hovey wrote: > >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 >> >> > -- Jay
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970813215258.1519A-100000>