Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

[Martin Sugioarto]

Am Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:18:03 +0200
schrieb Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg>:

> The -RELEASE things is just a freeze (or, let's say tested freeze) of 
> the corresponding branch at some time. It is the code available and 
> tested at that time.

Hi Daniel,

obviously performance is not a quality aspect, only stability.
 
> FreeBSD is not a distribution. It also compiles with the latest
> compiler 
> - LLVM. :)

I thought that the "D" in FreeBSD stands for "distribution". Yes, it's
ok that it compiles with LLVM. Does it also run faster in benchmarks?

> I find it amusing, that people want everything compiled with GCC 4.7, 
> which is still very much developing, therefore highly unstable and 
> (probably) full of bugs.

When you don't use the software don't complain that it is buggy,
because you won't find the bugs. You cannot always tell the others to
make everything perfect.

I don't want to have everything compiled on $COMPILER. I want that
there is a reasonable quality. And for me quality is not only
stability, but also speed.

> Many suggested that the Linux binaries be run via the FreeBSD Linux 
> emulation. Unchanged.
> There is one problem here though, the emulation is still 32 bit.

I'm not talking about emulation. I don't use FreeBSD to run emulated
binaries. I (any many people) want efficient servers and eventually
desktops. You should not expect people to tune the system for speed,
when it's clear that default setting does not make any sense. People
will use default settings, because they trust developers that they
thought about balanced stability, security and performance.

> FreeBSD has safe default.

This is what I am talking about. Don't complain that the benchmark does
not show efficience. No one is interested in tuning FreeBSD just for a
benchmark application.

> It is supposed to work out of the box on 
> whatever hardware you put it. As much as it has drives for that 
> hardware, of course.
> Once you have working installation, you may tweak it all the way you
> wish.

But if you don't tweak, you get a fair result in a benchmark. This is
what you will see as a user of the system. These are the default
settings, that means developers chose them as the BEST choice for the
system.
 
> If your installation is pre-optimized, chances are it will crash all
> the time on you and there will be no easy way for you to fix, short
> of installing another "distribution".

Sorry, no. If optimization makes bugs appear, there are bugs in the
code (somewhere). And you will never find them when you hide them like
this. You will also never see many advances in performance.

--
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance/attachments/20111223/0a0c9bd3/signature.pgp