Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 08:39:47 +0000 (GMT) From: ee96199@tom.fe.up.pt To: spork <spork@super-g.com> Cc: Steve Hovey <shovey@buffnet.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linux vs freebsd testimonial Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.96.970404082641.11972A-100000@tom.fe.up.pt> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970403145730.16928H-100000@super-g.inch.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ok. I will also tell my experience...
On Thu, 3 Apr 1997, spork wrote:
> Since we've gotten along fairly well in our migration from Linux, I
> thought I'd share my experiences as well...
I used Linux for almost 2 years and then changed to FreeBSD despite it
lack of support of the Iomega ZIP drive (Official Support, I mean).
> These have been the most trouble-free machines we've worked with. Some of
> the recent security problems were a bit tough (lots of cvsup-ing), but
> nothing compared to the nasty Slackware Linux Bug-o-the-month. The only
Instead of using Slackware you could use RedHat which is much more safer.
When a hole appears they imediatly release an update. This was the
distribution I used.
> reboots *any* of these machines have seen were intentional, which is
> something I just can't say about Linux. Performance is much better, and
I don't know what they did with 2.2.1 because the Byte Benchmark gave me
this results (I will only print the average):
Linux 2.0.18 (generic kernel from RedHat Linux 4.0)........ 10.5
FreeBSD 2.2.1 (generic kernel)............................. 12.9
FreeBSD 2.1.5 ('personalized' kernel)...................... 6.8
It's great... My FreeBSD box it's much faster than a Linux one! :-)
About reboots in FreeBSD they are only intencional because this is the
best OS of the world! But one I forced it to crash: 2 or 3 make worlds
(I don't remember) and a make world in the X11R6 tree while cracking
1000 passwords at the same time!
> We have to keep one Linux web server for compatibility with some odd
> sourceless C cgi's, but the other two will be history soon. Our news
> server is running Linux, but it's being replaced with a machine to be
> named "fridge" which will have 3 SCSI busses and 15 drives, and of course
> be running FBSD.
That's nice.
>
> I must say, this has made my job much easier. Linux is just too
> unpredictable when you don't have the time to play the
> "kernel-of-the-week" game. One of the Linux boxes still does the routine
> of freezing with no log entries or other hints; which is extremely
> frustrating. FBSD just seems like it was meant to be in a production
> environment...
Remember: FreeBSD is not a clone! Linux is! i.e. FreeBSD is Unix(r)
One more thing: Some days ago I forced FreeBSD to use 78 MB of swap while
I was using 3 console windows, 2 xterms and a ghostview and it responded
blindly. :-) With Linux I would have to wait for the things that were
being moved from and out of swap.
I am considering upgrading from 16MB to 32MB of RAM... I thing that
FreeBSD will get much faster because it will use plenty of cache and
buffers. Anyone agrees?
>
> Thanks to all involved,
>
> Charles
>
> spork@super-g.com
> spork@inch.com
>
> On Wed, 2 Apr 1997, Steve Hovey wrote:
>
> >
> > A few weeks ago, my single linux box fried. I replaced both the hard
> > drive (with an identicle one) and linux with freebsd 2.1.5.
> >
> > The machine runs majordomo, ftp, apache, and an irc server.
> >
> > The performance is way up there! Under linux it would frequently slug
> > down to a crawl. under FreeBSD it just keeps zipping along.
> >
> > There is a very definite noticable difference in response and load
> > handling.
> >
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.OSF.3.96.970404082641.11972A-100000>