Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 11:48:46 +0200 From: Andrea Brancatelli <abrancatelli@schema31.it> To: Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com> Cc: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@freebsd.org>, freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Benchmarks results for FreeBSD 11 Message-ID: <827183a944ee4052649c152d65204444@schema31.it> In-Reply-To: <20160821144505.27c0f55d@X220.alogt.com> References: <20160819073422.4292997b@X220.alogt.com> <af0fefab-69d7-f0a9-3d6d-4a9891d5a156@FreeBSD.org> <20160821144505.27c0f55d@X220.alogt.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Il 2016-08-21 08:45 Erich Dollansky ha scritto: > I am sure that some know of this site: > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=2bsd-7linux-bench&num=4 > > I wonder about the results for FreeBSD. As I do not have 11 on my > machines, a stupid question. Are there still some debugging aids > enabled in 11? > They're off in those versions, but did note compiler (and compiler > args) differences between within most tests (See attachments) as you > mentioned. the benchmark then compares the off-the-shelve distributions. Excuse me, as a casual reader of the list, I don't get this "critique". I never recompile my installations, I just use them from the installation CD (as probably 90% of the rest of the world), so I don't get what is wrong with the approach of comparing an out-of-the-box FreeBSD 11 with an out-of-the-box Ubuntu whatever. If FreeBSD 11 "out-the-box" performs slow because the standard compilers options aren't good it's not a problem with the benchmarking platform but with the default CD compiling options. Am I getting it wrong? Thanks :) --- Andrea Brancatelli Schema31 S.p.a. Responsabile IT ROMA - BO - FI - PA ITALY Tel: +39.06.98.358.472 Cell: +39.331.2488468 Fax: +39.055.71.880.466 Società del Gruppo SC31 ITALIA From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Mon Aug 22 10:14:29 2016 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22980BC0088 for <freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:14:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lars@e-new.0x20.net) Received: from mail.0x20.net (mail.0x20.net [IPv6:2001:aa8:fffb:1::3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "0x20.net", Issuer "StartCom Class 1 DV Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB3D6165F; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:14:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lars@e-new.0x20.net) Received: from e-new.0x20.net (mail.0x20.net [IPv6:2001:aa8:fffb:1::3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.0x20.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C73FF6E0081; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:14:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from e-new.0x20.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by e-new.0x20.net (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id u7MAEQFW067346; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:14:26 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from lars@e-new.0x20.net) Received: (from lars@localhost) by e-new.0x20.net (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id u7MAENpx065914; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:14:23 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from lars) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:14:23 +0200 From: Lars Engels <lars.engels@0x20.net> To: Andrea Brancatelli <abrancatelli@schema31.it> Cc: Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com>, freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, Kubilay Kocak <koobs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Benchmarks results for FreeBSD 11 Message-ID: <20160822101423.GF18643@e-new.0x20.net> References: <20160819073422.4292997b@X220.alogt.com> <af0fefab-69d7-f0a9-3d6d-4a9891d5a156@FreeBSD.org> <20160821144505.27c0f55d@X220.alogt.com> <827183a944ee4052649c152d65204444@schema31.it> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="SnG0pWpA7SYxRffL" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <827183a944ee4052649c152d65204444@schema31.it> X-Editor: VIM - Vi IMproved 7.4 X-Operation-System: FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE-p23 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>, <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>; List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:14:29 -0000 --SnG0pWpA7SYxRffL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:48:46AM +0200, Andrea Brancatelli wrote: > Il 2016-08-21 08:45 Erich Dollansky ha scritto: >=20 > > I am sure that some know of this site: > >=20 > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=3Darticle&item=3D2bsd-7linux-benc= h&num=3D4 > >=20 > > I wonder about the results for FreeBSD. As I do not have 11 on my=20 > > machines, a stupid question. Are there still some debugging aids=20 > > enabled in 11? =20 > > They're off in those versions, but did note compiler (and compiler > > args) differences between within most tests (See attachments) as you > > mentioned. > the benchmark then compares the off-the-shelve distributions.=20 >=20 > Excuse me, as a casual reader of the list, I don't get this "critique".= =20 >=20 > I never recompile my installations, I just use them from the > installation CD (as probably 90% of the rest of the world), so I don't > get what is wrong with the approach of comparing an out-of-the-box > FreeBSD 11 with an out-of-the-box Ubuntu whatever.=20 >=20 > If FreeBSD 11 "out-the-box" performs slow because the standard compilers > options aren't good it's not a problem with the benchmarking platform > but with the default CD compiling options.=20 >=20 > Am I getting it wrong?=20 The problem here is that Phoronix took a Beta version of FreeBSD 11. Beta versions have a lot of debugging (malloc, invariants, witness) options enabled which make it significantly slower than release versions. This is even obviously when you run a Beta as a desktop. It just feels much slower. --SnG0pWpA7SYxRffL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJXutB/XxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ4RjQwMDE3RTRERjUzMTI1N0FGRTUxNDlF NTRDQjM3RDNBMDg5RDZEAAoJEOVMs306CJ1tSiAH/j5Qk27TT8COtpNgcGd9aUJ6 dLpYR1g9q2wbcU5w0qnXwL4ciqIKQ0BSnJZ9H+AaVF8RdaW9aZcDnH/a6bedOzFs 8G/ZAEl3dPes49egBF27GgirNrDeN558FfnhnO4LAVu3FtOQW3c/kqnc+AmV+1Zt 9+2bGAyB4M+/tqguo/HwYciGQ+QayNUsV52IBx7Pz1ZTXVHfR0VDDmpK8017C/a0 U6J0U1ey0Kx2NN5miisuxeKPwygJsNagejdergyYXIoMDHbBVZ3N5a7tI7ub5z4L RaDflpLEyeDAeevK7kxJQ3Mo7dsGGbbJBtLml4og4oSC7/WfkgGsyYlGVfPCqhQ= =RpI8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --SnG0pWpA7SYxRffL--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?827183a944ee4052649c152d65204444>