Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 11th Mar 2008 10:05 UTC, submitted by Chezz
FreeBSD "Since the conclusion of the SMPng project, the focus of SMP development in FreeBSD has shifted from deploying locking infrastructure to careful profiling and optimization of kernel SMP strategies for increased performance on common workloads. FreeBSD 7.0 was the first release to benefit from this optimization work." The status of this work includes MySQL workload benchmarks and memory allocator performance in the new FreeBSD 8 branch. Also, here is a recent presentation showing FreeBSD compared to several other operating systems like NetBSD, DrangonFly, Solaris, and Linux.
Thread beginning with comment 304591
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: please..
by Chezz on Wed 12th Mar 2008 02:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: please.."
Chezz
Member since:
2005-07-11


While you were quoting Nick, why did you not quote this:

"""
The Linux kernel used is not a "stable release" whereas FreeBSD is (although I'm not aware of any significant performance improvements over the 2.6.24 kernel -- 2.6.25-rc4 is simply what I have installed on the machine)
"""


I do not need to quote it. Cuz It does not server any purpose in my argument nor it does mean anything. FreeBSD 8-CURRENT branch is active and can be used for benchmarks if you like. If it's going to be a future release then once it is released compare it with its equivalent FreeBSD dev.

Regarding 2.6.22, you had a similar post in the previous thread. I replied to you here http://osnews.com/thread?303772 there is no need to repeat it again because there are several benchmarks on 2.6.22 which show different results.

My only annoyance has been the way the FreeBSD folks have paraded Kris' benchmarks around ad nauseam for the past couple of months.


No need to be annoyed ;) All FreeBSD devs have worked hard to bring FreeBSD back on top. In order to let the world hear it, such presentations and benchmarks are needed and justified. He has all the raw data as well as the hardware so If you think he is not telling the truth then you might want to ask the linux devs who worked with him to withdraw their patches from the linux kernel tree to see the effecth of his constructive and friendly criticism.

Edited 2008-03-12 02:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: please..
by sbergman27 on Wed 12th Mar 2008 14:05 in reply to "RE[3]: please.."
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

What you keep missing is that the *difference* is actually in the glibc versions. You keep talking about the Linux *kernel* improving to match FreeBSD. When, in fact, the problem was in glibc-2.6. There is no inconsistency in the benchmarks. 2.6.22 beats FreeBSD 7.0 with glibc-2.7, and does not with glibc-2.6. I believe there was some kernel regression in 2.6.23 when Linux switched schedulers. It would be interesting to see 2.6.24 results. But I imagine we will see 2.6.25 final results next month, at which point your claim that we should be testing against the FreeBSD8 development version will be moot.

And no, no one in their right mind would run the FreeBSD 8 development version on a production server right now... or a month from now.

However, I'm very happy to see that FreeBSD is back up to snuff after all this time. I'm sure that a lot of people worked very hard on that come-back.

Reply Parent Score: 3