From nobody Sat Dec 11 09:52:10 2021 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9368318CB5CD for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2021 09:52:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xpetrl@beepc.ch) Received: from srv.fastssdserver.com (srv.fastssdserver.com [208.91.104.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4JB3392FFxz4R6f for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2021 09:52:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xpetrl@beepc.ch) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=beepc.ch; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version: Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=KkucM7RZzadtd1L7SRhBBitfxVDkJEcxPKpO05x+Gi4=; b=Om6jWS2+xqIL97ubmg6ZLXnIyo /RGJ0GiBbkQkgfyT/S6Xe+vu3AVW7JykSBV5nmw++nwV5lKjCNUu1fC/DyPppcpmvM4or2qv5YRgU LAs8wEIKTt1TEz8wCdh9pJbtodat81ME1jahpMQGRASQ8xhBcoTuuoVtDJmpMXFKd+TuPqqNH/YUQ t/QRxjyG5h9+Qnwt2EBewAiQTYB2cAJ4CKfxbN/HK7GZiaVSRiDUD6qilGk30o4KmCKL9KxLRvnXU belnEZHzBruqWSe9Ce3Mj0MPKlN1+/cTXaObcr1mn2/2zMfdgFjseIFz/68HMyw+MAj0M6fInMXbt NTqWCqdQ==; Received: from [185.20.202.205] (port=34314 helo=[192.168.3.177]) by srv.fastssdserver.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvz3B-0001ZV-6Y for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2021 14:52:13 +0500 Subject: Re: Benchmarks: FreeBSD 13 vs. NetBSD 9.2 vs. OpenBSD 7 vs. DragonFlyBSD 6 vs. Linux To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: From: "beepc.ch" Message-ID: Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2021 10:52:10 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - srv.fastssdserver.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - beepc.ch X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: srv.fastssdserver.com: authenticated_id: xpetrl@beepc.ch X-Authenticated-Sender: srv.fastssdserver.com: xpetrl@beepc.ch X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4JB3392FFxz4R6f X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=beepc.ch header.s=default header.b=Om6jWS2+; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of xpetrl@beepc.ch designates 208.91.104.146 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=xpetrl@beepc.ch X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.00 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(0.00)[+ip4:208.91.104.146]; HAS_X_SOURCE(0.00)[]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[beepc.ch:+]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; HAS_X_ANTIABUSE(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:35913, ipnet:208.91.104.0/23, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; HAS_X_AS(0.00)[xpetrl@beepc.ch]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(0.00)[beepc.ch:s=default]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[beepc.ch]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; BAD_REP_POLICIES(0.10)[]; RBL_VIRUSFREE_BOTNET(2.00)[208.91.104.146:from]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(1.00)[1.000]; HAS_X_GMSV(0.00)[xpetrl@beepc.ch]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N > I am surprised to see that the BSD cluster today has much worse performance > than Linux. > What do you think of this? "Default" FreeBSD install setting are quite conservative. The Linux common distros are high tuned, those benchmark is in my opinion comparison of apples and oranges. Comparing "default" FreeBSD install with "default" Slackware install would be more interesting, because Slackware builds are at most vanilla.