Benchmarks results for FreeBSD 11
Slawa Olhovchenkov
slw at zxy.spb.ru
Mon Aug 22 12:02:27 UTC 2016
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 12:14:23PM +0200, Lars Engels wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:48:46AM +0200, Andrea Brancatelli wrote:
> > Il 2016-08-21 08:45 Erich Dollansky ha scritto:
> >
> > > I am sure that some know of this site:
> > >
> > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=2bsd-7linux-bench&num=4
> > >
> > > I wonder about the results for FreeBSD. As I do not have 11 on my
> > > machines, a stupid question. Are there still some debugging aids
> > > enabled in 11?
> > > They're off in those versions, but did note compiler (and compiler
> > > args) differences between within most tests (See attachments) as you
> > > mentioned.
> > the benchmark then compares the off-the-shelve distributions.
> >
> > Excuse me, as a casual reader of the list, I don't get this "critique".
> >
> > I never recompile my installations, I just use them from the
> > installation CD (as probably 90% of the rest of the world), so I don't
> > get what is wrong with the approach of comparing an out-of-the-box
> > FreeBSD 11 with an out-of-the-box Ubuntu whatever.
> >
> > If FreeBSD 11 "out-the-box" performs slow because the standard compilers
> > options aren't good it's not a problem with the benchmarking platform
> > but with the default CD compiling options.
> >
> > Am I getting it wrong?
>
> The problem here is that Phoronix took a Beta version of FreeBSD 11.
> Beta versions have a lot of debugging (malloc, invariants, witness)
> options enabled which make it significantly slower than release
> versions. This is even obviously when you run a Beta as a desktop. It
> just feels much slower.
No.
All debugs in amd64 is off at time of BETA.
More information about the freebsd-stable
mailing list