Re: Benchmarks: FreeBSD 13 vs. NetBSD 9.2 vs. OpenBSD 7 vs. DragonFlyBSD 6 vs. Linux

I can say that these  "micro" benchmarks are not  "so much" useful .
When such comparisons are made based on "abstract" views , they
DO NOT SHOW very much utility .

Over previous years I am always stressing that proper comparisons would be
based on  a "specified" workload :  Which distributions is more suitable
for that
"specified" work load ? Testing / benchmarking should be performed with
respect
to such criteria  , for example ,  continuously "a day work necessary for a
profession" ,
"a web server for a 'specified' task" , "a NFS server working for a
'specified' application" .

Then comparisons of parts causing significant differences may generate
useful
improvement possibilities .

When we see *BSD distributions as a single group , it is obvious that
everyone has its
own priorities to realize . The same is true also for Linux distributions .
Without taking such differences into consideration , reaching some
conclusions about them  would only be a waste of time .


With my best regards ,

Mehmet Erol Sanliturk







On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 1:40 PM Sami Halabi <sodynet1@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> I see these claims over and over.
> So I must ask.
> Is there any tunibg guide(s) to make the default not conservative in a
> regrding to several use cases like using as web server? How to Utilize gpu
> maybe?
> I know there are few network (aka routing / forwarding) guides.. but maybe
> instead of that superior feeling "oh they are linuxish and knoe shit" maybe
> better supply the tuning needed to get better results?
> And I'm not talking to get an engineer to analyze the tests case..
> Maybe the linux defaults fit better for most use cases rather than being
> conservative??
>
> Just to be clear I almost not used linux and always freebsd for simplicity
> usage..  but I must say it makes me wonder
>
> Sami
>
> בתאריך שבת, 11 בדצמ׳ 2021, 11:52, מאת beepc.ch ‏<xpetrl@beepc.ch>:
>
> > > 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.
> >
> >
>