FreeBSD vs Ubuntu - Discuss...

[Francisco Reyes]

Moving to chat instead of performance. 

>> This was discussed in detail in slashdot.. starting with the fact that most 
>> likely debug switches were not turned off for FreeBSD.
> 
> "All of the FreeBSD and Ubuntu options were left at their defaults."
> 
> My question is why is FreeBSD's disk i/o performance so bad?

As I mentioned... this was discussed actively in slashdot. You will  find 
there many good comments on this.

> Not just in the benchmarks with debugging on, but in real world usage
> where it actually matters.

Are you saying this from actual experience or from reading other people's 
comments? If it is from actual experience and XYZ version of Linux does a 
particular job better then I don't see why you should not consider using 
what works best.

As someone who has had to use Redhat for over a year because that is what 
this job uses... I would trade some performance for not having to deal with 
all the peculiarities in Linux distros.

Also, as  mentioned in the slashdot article discussion, some of the reasons 
Linux may do better on some operations are a tradeoff between 
stability/security and speed.

http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1384455

>From having to use Linux I have found some instances where FreeBSD may no  
not be up to par (ie Java), but overall I would much rather use FreeBSD if I 
had a choice. "Features" like the OOM killer are, in my opinion, extremely 
poorly designed and likely worst executed.