Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:08:27 +0100 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance Message-ID: <gggmbb$un6$1@ger.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <DE23C2B055DA4BC683BDCAA95FF7B736@multiplay.co.uk> References: <DE23C2B055DA4BC683BDCAA95FF7B736@multiplay.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig8E1F6E2D12B25CE4FF20A293 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Steven Hartland wrote: > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=3Darticle&item=3Dos_threeway_2008= &num=3D1 >=20 > Was interesting until I saw this:- >=20 The results seem well within expectations, for the sort of benchmarks they did: there is little difference between the systems. Depending on the details of how they did the benchmarks and how they processed the results (if at all), the results can even be within the margin of error (i.e. useless for mutual comparison except to show the systems are all very similar). The benchmarks they did are mostly focused on number crunching and do not even touch the area of system scalability to multiple CPUs, which could have been easily done but they chose not to. Number crunching is a bad choice for system scalability measure because down to the metal, all systems use similar compilers and there's nothing the OS can do to improve (or actually hinder, in the common case) CPU's execution of math code. For example, they could have included the "shells concurrent" benchmark from unixbench, started multiple bonnie++'s in parallel, and included a few system benchmarks like lighttpd+siege, parallel gzip (pigz) and blogbench. > "However, it's important to reiterate that all three operating systems > were left in their stock configurations and that no additional tweaking= > had occurred." >=20 > I kernel debugging stuff still enabled in FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2, if so > these results are useless > and someone should contact the article writers to correct this. There is no debugging in -STABLE. WYSIWYG :) --------------enig8E1F6E2D12B25CE4FF20A293 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJK9yrldnAQVacBcgRAi9gAKDTJrjY5Aip2SS4eVZnL4ljXAQ43wCeIIUm aAm2L89dP41YSge7EbdQvrg= =uGmT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig8E1F6E2D12B25CE4FF20A293--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?gggmbb$un6$1>