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.
pgpOsKyxPVeSN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
