Linked by Drumhellar on Wed 25th Sep 2013 22:02 UTC
FreeBSD

I've been a big fan of FreeBSD since I first acquired 4.4 on 4 CDs. By that point, I had already spent a lot of time in Linux, but I was always put off by its instability and inconsistency. Once I had FreeBSD installed, it felt like a dream. Everything worked the way it was supposed to, and the consistency of its design meant even older documentation would be mostly applicable without having to figure out how my system was different. There is a reason why in the early days of the Internet, a huge portion of servers ran FreeBSD.

But, that was a while ago. Since then, Linux has matured greatly and has garnered a lot of momentum, becoming the dominant Unix platform. FreeBSD certainly hasn't stood still, however. The FreeBSD team has kept current with hardware support, new features, and a modern, performant design.

Thread beginning with comment 573340
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
project_2501
Member since:
2006-03-20

Thanks for the article. I'm also looking forward to a series on netbsd, openbsd, dragonfly .. and maybe pc-bsd which isn't really different just made for desktops.

If I can make a humble request for the article series:

* I'd like real facts. We keep hearing lots of opinions on "stability", "high volume traffic", "low memory footprint", "bad concurrent performance". Things have moved on since 2002. I'd like to see a proper set of tests done to back such claims up - what do we mean by "stability", .. the last set of tests I saw were probably a decade ago http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/
Tests could include things people care about today like latency under io load, etc.

* rather than focus just on user-facing features, maybe talk about the internal engineering of these systems. These systems actually do have engineering principles that they are built to and evolve around. Perhaps a critique of whether such lofty goals are a worth it - the relative free-for-all in Linux seems tr have paid off, or has it? Does the human intensive code auditing of openbsd have value if 3rd party apps are badly done? Should netbsd be the true core bsd from which drivers are then reimplemented elsewhere?

I don't mean to detract from your good work - it's great - just saying what I'd personally like to see.

Honestly - for a good bunch of serious users, the installation is done once, boot up times are kinda less important on long-running servers..... the focus is more on what these systems are like in operation ... threading performance, latency, resilience to failure, ease of upgrading and management ....

Reply Parent Score: 5

Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

I will be sure to include some more info on internals and now the different BSDs are put together, and how they differ from each other.

Since FreeBSD has an excellent system architecture handbook (http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/arch-handbook/), I'll touch on it more when I come back around when 10 is out.

Reply Parent Score: 2