Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 16:06:21 -0500 From: Travis Ruthenburg <travis@trickster.net> To: "Andreas Klemm" <andreas@klemm.gtn.com>, "John S. Dyson" <dyson@iquest.net> Cc: <joseph@randomnetworks.com>, <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>, <de-bsd-chat@DE.FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 3.1 SMP outperforms SuSE 6.0 SMP by factor 2.3 !!! Message-ID: <199903152150.QAA13458@trickster.net>
index | next in thread | raw e-mail
On 3/15/99 4:29 PM, Andreas Klemm (andreas@klemm.gtn.com) uttered: >On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 03:14:31PM -0500, John S. Dyson wrote: >> Andreas Klemm said: >> > On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 01:58:15AM -0500, Joseph Scott wrote: >> > > On Mon, 15 Mar 1999, Andreas Klemm wrote: >> > > >> > > I was under the impression that the general Linux community felt >> > > that the 2.2 kernel was the new stable. I always thought it was neat how >> > > the new Linux 2.2 kernel and the new FreeBSD 3 came out around the same >> > > time, and both seemed to make big jumps in their use of things like smp. >> > >> > No, FreeBSD SMP is in good shape since over a year or so ... >> > >> FreeBSD SMP needs in-depth work, but does work okay for most workstation >> loads. > >To bring in some new flesh here ... I repeated the tests with Linux >Kernel release 2.2.3. And yes, the results are better ... > >But we are still 19% better ;-) That's great to hear. I'm sure everyone would be happier if FreeBSD's SMP performance was 99% better, but this way Linux Users won't automatically discount the results. IMHO, these are the kinds of tests and numbers FreeBSD advocates need. Travis Ruthenburg bjork bjork bjork travis@trickster.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the messagehelp
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903152150.QAA13458>