FreeBSD vs Ubuntu - Discuss...

[Attilio Rao]

2009/9/30 O. Hartmann <ohartman at mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>:
> Attilio Rao wrote:
>> 2009/9/29 Randy Schultz <schulra at earlham.edu>:
>>> ----- "Andrew Kuriger" <a.kuriger at liquidphlux.com> spaketh thusly:
>>>
>>> |
>>> | Since the article says that they left the debugging features on I
>>> | think
>>> | this has a bit to do with it. Obviously the testers didn't care to
>>> | read the
>>> | documentation, and didn't seem to care to use the same compiler which
>>> | is
>>> | available in ports, I believe it is safe to chuck this lame
>>> | benchmark.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hrm.  IMHO, this benchmark actually tells us something interesting.  It tells us
>>> that with the anchor thrown overboard, freebsd is nearly as fast as linux.
>>
>> I don't think this is the case.
>> The tester claims to be using FreeBSD-RC1 which has all the mentioned
>> debugging options off.
>> And yes, we should adjust UPDATING in order to remove the (now)
>> misleading writing about the debugging options.
>>
>> I think that the most interesting opionion these benchmarks tell is
>> that we are slow on random, threaded  I/O operations. I think we need
>> to investigate more in this direction.
>>
>> Attilio
>>
>>
>
> Well, since FreeBSD 8.0 started, I realized on several boxes (doens't
> matter whether SMP or UP, 2 GB or 8 GB or 16 GB) massive performance
> issues when compiling, even on a 8-core box. This is not 'measured' in
> hard numbers, it is the 'feeling' since we swapped to 8.0, but still
> using the same setup and software environment. On boxes with X11, on
> heavy disk I/O and/or heavy compiling, X11 clients sometimes stops for
> 90 seconds, mouse gets jumpy etc. This is well known and well ignored,
> although I'm not the only one experiencing this.

What do you mean with 'well known' and 'well ignored'?
Do you have pointes to such issues?

Attilio


-- 
Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein