Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 22:39:15 -0400 (EDT) From: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu> To: sprice@hiwaay.net (Steve Price) Cc: acahalan@cs.uml.edu (Albert D. Cahalan), freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Regarding New FreeBSD BenchMark From Sysadmin Mag (left out a fiew tuning options) Message-ID: <200107130239.f6D2dFD134165@saturn.cs.uml.edu> In-Reply-To: <20010712211356.D75539@bsd.havk.org> from "Steve Price" at Jul 12, 2001 09:13:56 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Steve Price writes: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 10:05:00PM -0400, Albert D. Cahalan wrote: >> It's bad enough that a tuned FreeBSD box still collapses under load, >> while the untuned Linux box doesn't. > [snip] > > Is this a troll?! In my experience the exact opposite is true. > Of course YMMV depending on your "religious" views. You tell me what this looks like, remembering that the first graph shows time (lower is better) and the second shows mails/hour. http://www.sysadminmag.com/articles/2001/0108/0108q/0108q_f2.htm http://www.sysadminmag.com/articles/2001/0108/0108q/0108q_f3.htm Ah, never mind the untuned Linux box. Check out the untuned Windows 2000 box beating the tuned FreeBSD box. If pointing out the obvious is a troll, well gee... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200107130239.f6D2dFD134165>